@danieleneal @alex - gave a shot at the CLJ-2116: https://github.com/clojure/spec.alpha/pull/1. Idea is to support a optional conforming callback for conform & explain, allowing specs to be separated from conforming. Would be used like this:

(deftest conforming-callback-test
  (let [string->int-conforming
        (fn [spec]
          (condp = spec
            int? (fn [_ x _]
                   (cond
                     (int? x) x
                     (string? x) (try
                                   (Long/parseLong x)
                                   (catch Exception _
                                     ::s/invalid))
                     :else ::s/invalid))
            :else nil))]

    (testing "no conforming callback"
      (is (= 1 (s/conform int? 1)))
      (is (= ::s/invalid (s/conform int? "1"))))

    (testing "with conforming callback"
      (is (= 1 (s/conform int? 1 string->int-conforming)))
      (is (= 1 (s/conform int? "1" string->int-conforming))))))

Are there any known issues with clojure.test.check and multi arity functions?

for some reason when I try to run (st/check make-action) my repl just hangs forever

same thing out of the repl too - lein test just hangs (running generative tests via clojure.test.check in my normal test suite)

I did verify that I could generate data for all the (s/def) expressions individually - that seems to work

@scaturr did you try generating (s/cat :type ::type :error? ::error? :payload (s/? ::payload)) as well?

I did not - I will try that now

yes that worked 😕

I'm trying this out too

can't reproduce; check ran fine for me

I changed ::payload back to map? for that example

instead of string? - though both produce the error

what version of test.check are you running?

thank you for your help by the way 🙂

probably 0.10.0-alpha2

yeah

I’m on 0.9.0

I’ll try updating

that fixes it

thank you so much

well I'd certainly like to know what the difference is, but I don't think it matters enough to look into 😕

but if you figure it out, let me know 🙂

will do!

@ikitommi noted. I'm not going to do anything with it until I get a chance to ask Rich about it

hello people, for those looking at how to do coercion with specs, spec-coerce leverages your spec definitions to coerce value types 🙂 https://github.com/wilkerlucio/spec-coerce