This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2020-10-11
Channels
- # announcements (1)
- # babashka (132)
- # beginners (52)
- # calva (46)
- # clj-kondo (8)
- # cljdoc (17)
- # clojure (13)
- # clojure-australia (1)
- # clojure-dev (3)
- # clojure-europe (4)
- # clojurescript (4)
- # cloverage (1)
- # conjure (22)
- # datomic (9)
- # emacs (2)
- # fulcro (16)
- # leiningen (5)
- # malli (26)
- # off-topic (16)
- # pathom (3)
- # portal (5)
- # reagent (10)
- # reitit (5)
- # rewrite-clj (1)
- # ring (1)
- # shadow-cljs (14)
- # spacemacs (6)
- # tools-deps (10)
- # vim (11)
- # vscode (1)
- # xtdb (10)
Fixed a bunch of typos https://github.com/metosin/malli/pull/275
would like to make sci explicitly optional. either via a flag (non-breaking) or via explicit option (breaking, but for the better): https://github.com/metosin/malli/issues/276. Two days ago would have just done the latter, but now malli is released and goal has been not to break things. What do you think? save the breaking change for 1.0.0? just do it? something else?
I think a breaking change for the 1.0 release is ok. We know you plan to accrete only from 1.0
optional sci is great for the browser use case. making that the default is a good idea imho
good reason not yet to read sci-powered schemas from untrusted sources: https://github.com/borkdude/sci/issues/348
yes, the option1 would allow that:
(require '[malli.sci :as ms])
(require '[malli.core :as m])
(def options
{:evaluator (ms/evaluator)
:registry (ms/default-registry)})
(def Schema (m/schema [:fn '(fn [x] (string? x))] options))
(m/validate Schema "kikka")
; => true
.. would also remove need of :preloads
etc, as you actually need to require the code to make it work.
malli.sci would still require sci for you right. so then there's no need for preloads
also, currently you can swap the default registry
using the JVM/clj-compiler options, but not the default options. if you want to enable sci globally, that should be changed to swap the default options
. I did a spike on that, but had too much open issues to think that through. Now, it seems like it would have been a right call.
that would be big breaking change, but something that could be documented and migrated easily too.
Hi! does anyone have any experience using malli to validate/define the re-frame app-db?
@love.lagerkvist I’m doing this for forms currently https://github.com/stevebuik/fork-malli-ideas