-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 231
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add onNoneEncoding to schema.optional #2772
Merged
gcanti
merged 11 commits into
Effect-TS:main
from
vinassefranche:add-onNoneEncoding-to-schema-optional
May 19, 2024
Merged
Changes from 6 commits
Commits
Show all changes
11 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
124036b
Add changeset
vinassefranche a5b7f01
Add onNoneEncoding in optional options types
vinassefranche 657d09c
Add tests and implementation for exact not set
vinassefranche d6687be
Handle the exact case too
vinassefranche 80649ca
Restore ?: for encoded token
vinassefranche b687d9a
Make onNoneEncoding accept an option
vinassefranche 3d2c1fa
Restore ?: for encoded token in the second overload
vinassefranche 440e406
Use a lazy arg for onNoneEncoding
vinassefranche db6bcaf
add dtslint tests
gcanti 72b8d87
avoid using when it's unnecessary
gcanti ea7a9b9
Add additional type tests
vinassefranche File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ | ||
--- | ||
"@effect/schema": patch | ||
--- | ||
|
||
Add onNoneEncoding for Schema.optional used with {as: "Option"} |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
the same applies here, it should be
"?:"
as beforeThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
My bad, sorry! I'm fixing that quickly
Why not having define types that are re-used in both overloads? It feels a bit painful to have to update both every time but there might be some reasons I don't know of.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yeah, now that the type is quite big, it makes even more sense to define the type only once