Schema 0.68 (Release)
The ParseIssue
model in the @effect/schema/ParseResult
module has undergone a comprehensive redesign and simplification that enhances its expressiveness without compromising functionality. This section explores the motivation and details of this refactoring.
The Schema.filter
API has been improved to support more complex filtering that can involve multiple properties of a struct. This is especially useful for validations that compare two fields, such as ensuring that a password
field matches a confirm_password
field, a common requirement in form validations.
Previous Limitations:
Previously, while it was possible to implement a filter that compared two fields, there was no straightforward way to attach validation messages to a specific field. This posed challenges, especially in form validations where precise error reporting is crucial.
Example of Previous Implementation:
import { ArrayFormatter, Schema } from "@effect/schema"import { Either } from "effect"
const Password = Schema.Trim.pipe(Schema.minLength(1))
const MyForm = Schema.Struct({ password: Password, confirm_password: Password}).pipe( Schema.filter((input) => { if (input.password !== input.confirm_password) { return "Passwords do not match" } }))
console.log( "%o", Schema.decodeUnknownEither(MyForm)({ password: "abc", confirm_password: "d" }).pipe( Either.mapLeft((error) => ArrayFormatter.formatErrorSync(error)) ))/*{ _id: 'Either', _tag: 'Left', left: [ { _tag: 'Type', path: [], message: 'Passwords do not match' } ]}*/
In this scenario, while the filter functionally works, the lack of a specific error path (path: []
) means errors are not as descriptive or helpful as they could be.
With the new improvements, it’s now possible to specify an error path along with the message, which enhances error specificity and is particularly beneficial for integration with tools like react-hook-form
.
Updated Implementation Example:
import { ArrayFormatter, Schema } from "@effect/schema"import { Either } from "effect"
const Password = Schema.Trim.pipe(Schema.minLength(1))
const MyForm = Schema.Struct({ password: Password, confirm_password: Password}).pipe( Schema.filter((input) => { if (input.password !== input.confirm_password) { return { path: ["confirm_password"], message: "Passwords do not match" } } }))
console.log( "%o", Schema.decodeUnknownEither(MyForm)({ password: "abc", confirm_password: "d" }).pipe( Either.mapLeft((error) => ArrayFormatter.formatErrorSync(error)) ))/*{ _id: 'Either', _tag: 'Left', left: [ { _tag: 'Type', path: [ 'confirm_password' ], message: 'Passwords do not match' } ]}*/
This modification allows the error to be directly associated with the confirm_password
field, improving clarity for the end-user.
The refactored API also supports reporting multiple issues at once, which is useful in forms where several validation checks might fail simultaneously.
Example of Multiple Issues Reporting:
import { ArrayFormatter, Schema } from "@effect/schema"import { Either } from "effect"
const Password = Schema.Trim.pipe(Schema.minLength(1))const OptionalString = Schema.optional(Schema.String)
const MyForm = Schema.Struct({ password: Password, confirm_password: Password, name: OptionalString, surname: OptionalString}).pipe( Schema.filter((input) => { const issues: Array<Schema.FilterIssue> = [] // passwords must match if (input.password !== input.confirm_password) { issues.push({ path: ["confirm_password"], message: "Passwords do not match" }) } // either name or surname must be present if (!input.name && !input.surname) { issues.push({ path: ["surname"], message: "Surname must be present if name is not present" }) } return issues }))
console.log( "%o", Schema.decodeUnknownEither(MyForm)({ password: "abc", confirm_password: "d" }).pipe( Either.mapLeft((error) => ArrayFormatter.formatErrorSync(error)) ))/*{ _id: 'Either', _tag: 'Left', left: [ { _tag: 'Type', path: [ 'confirm_password' ], message: 'Passwords do not match' }, { _tag: 'Type', path: [ 'surname' ], message: 'Surname must be present if name is not present' } ]}*/
The ParseIssue
type has undergone a significant restructuring to improve its expressiveness and simplicity. This new model categorizes issues into leaf and composite types, enhancing clarity and making error handling more systematic.
Structure of ParseIssue Type:
export type ParseIssue = // leaf | Type | Missing | Unexpected | Forbidden // composite | Pointer | Refinement | Transformation | Composite
Key Changes in the Model:
-
New Members:
Composite
: A new class that aggregates multipleParseIssue
instances.Missing
: Identifies when a required element or value is absent.Unexpected
: Flags unexpected elements or values in the input.Pointer
: Points to the part of the data structure where an issue occurs.
-
Removed Members:
- Previous categories like
Declaration
,TupleType
,TypeLiteral
,Union
,Member
,Key
, andIndex
have been consolidated under theComposite
type for a more streamlined approach.
- Previous categories like
Definition of Composite:
interface Composite { readonly _tag: "Composite" readonly ast: AST.Annotated readonly actual: unknown readonly issues: ParseIssue | NonEmptyReadonlyArray<ParseIssue> readonly output?: unknown}
We’ve updated our internal function getErrorMessage
to enhance how error messages are formatted throughout our application. This function constructs an error message that includes the reason for the error, additional details, the path to where the error occurred, and the schema’s AST representation if available.
Example
import { JSONSchema, Schema } from "@effect/schema"
JSONSchema.make(Schema.Struct({ a: Schema.Void }))/*throws:Error: Missing annotationat path: ["a"]details: Generating a JSON Schema for this schema requires a "jsonSchema" annotationschema (VoidKeyword): void*/
Annotations are used to add metadata to tuple elements, which can describe the purpose or requirements of each element more clearly. This can be particularly useful when generating documentation or JSON schemas from your schemas.
import { JSONSchema, Schema } from "@effect/schema"
// Defining a tuple with annotations for each coordinate in a pointconst Point = Schema.Tuple( Schema.element(Schema.Number).annotations({ title: "X", description: "X coordinate" }), Schema.optionalElement(Schema.Number).annotations({ title: "Y", description: "optional Y coordinate" }))
// Generating a JSON Schema from the tupleconsole.log(JSONSchema.make(Point))/*Output:{ '$schema': 'http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#', type: 'array', minItems: 1, items: [ { type: 'number', description: 'X coordinate', title: 'X' }, { type: 'number', description: 'optional Y coordinate', title: 'Y' } ], additionalItems: false}*/
You can provide custom messages for missing fields or elements using the new missingMessage
annotation.
Example (missing field)
import { Schema } from "@effect/schema"
const Person = Schema.Struct({ name: Schema.propertySignature(Schema.String).annotations({ missingMessage: () => "Name is required" })})
Schema.decodeUnknownSync(Person)({})/*Output:Error: { readonly name: string }└─ ["name"] └─ Name is required*/
Example (missing element)
import { Schema } from "@effect/schema"
const Point = Schema.Tuple( Schema.element(Schema.Number).annotations({ missingMessage: () => "X coordinate is required" }), Schema.element(Schema.Number).annotations({ missingMessage: () => "Y coordinate is required" }))
Schema.decodeUnknownSync(Point)([], { errors: "all" })/*Output:Error: readonly [number, number]├─ [0]│ └─ X coordinate is required└─ [1] └─ Y coordinate is required*/
The individual APIs that were previously used to add annotations to schemas have been removed. This change was made because these individual annotation APIs did not provide significant value and were burdensome to maintain. Instead, you can now use the annotations
method directly or the Schema.annotations
API for a pipe
-able approach.
Before
import { Schema } from "@effect/schema"
// Example of adding an identifier using a dedicated APIconst schema = Schema.String.pipe(Schema.identifier("myIdentitifer"))
Now
import { Schema } from "@effect/schema"
// Directly using the annotations methodconst schema = Schema.String.annotations({ identifier: "myIdentitifer" })// orconst schema2 = Schema.String.pipe( // Using the annotations function in a pipe-able format Schema.annotations({ identifier: "myIdentitifer" }))
Now the *Sync
and asserts
APIs throw a ParseError
while before they was throwing a simple Error
with a cause
containing a ParseIssue
import { ParseResult, Schema } from "@effect/schema"
try { Schema.decodeUnknownSync(Schema.String)(null)} catch (e) { console.log(ParseResult.isParseError(e)) // true}
const asserts: (u: unknown) => asserts u is string = Schema.asserts( Schema.String)try { asserts(null)} catch (e) { console.log(ParseResult.isParseError(e)) // true}
For all the details, head over to our changelog.