Re: Clojure.spec, maps, restrict valid keywords, easier way?

Bruce Hauman has done some work in this area both in figwheel and in a branch of leiningen. Basically, if I understand correctly, he looks for misspelled keywords in configuration maps by taking the levenstein distance between expected, valid, keywords and non-matching keywords in the

Re: Clojure.spec, maps, restrict valid keywords, easier way?

I have found eastwood to be useful for a number of things, however on keyword checking it failed terribly on our code base, though perhaps there have been updates since I last tried it. Thanks for the suggestion though. On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 7:26:01 PM UTC-5, Ben Brinckerhoff wrote: >

Re: Clojure.spec, maps, restrict valid keywords, easier way?

I'm actually planning to do exactly that in Cursive, and it's more or less what Eastwood does too per the link Ben posted. On 4 February 2017 at 14:23, Linus Ericsson wrote: > It would be great if an editor highlighted a (possibly qualified) keyword > that was used

Re: Clojure.spec, maps, restrict valid keywords, easier way?

It would be great if an editor highlighted a (possibly qualified) keyword that was used only in that particular place (given all code loaded). This wouldn't be bullet-proof, but would have highlighted mistakes like :encypted (but could still confuse :encrypted? with :encrypted, and whatnot).

Re: Clojure.spec, maps, restrict valid keywords, easier way?

The eastwood linter can also be configured to look for possibly misspelled keyword typos https://github.com/jonase/eastwood#keyword-typos On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 3:47:21 AM UTC-7, John Schmidt wrote: > > I suggest something like (defn fetch-encrypted [] (fetch-important-data > {:encrypt

Re: Clojure.spec, maps, restrict valid keywords, easier way?

I suggest something like (defn fetch-encrypted [] (fetch-important-data {:encrypt true})) + unit tests On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 2:56:34 AM UTC+1, Michael Gardner wrote: > > What would be the Right Way to deal with typos like (fetch-important-data > {:encypt true}), where the :encrypt key

Re: Clojure.spec, maps, restrict valid keywords, easier way?

What would be the Right Way to deal with typos like (fetch-important-data {:encypt true}), where the :encrypt key is optional? Timothy mentions auto-complete, which is better than nothing but doesn't feel like a real solution (especially to those who don't use auto-complete). > On Feb 2, 2017,

Re: Clojure.spec, maps, restrict valid keywords, easier way?

A good editor should auto-complete your keywords for you. Since using this feature in Cursive (same sort of thing is available in other editors) the cases where I've mis-spelled a keyword have dropped dramatically. It's a lot harder to mis-spell a keyword when you can just do: :egg/th and the rest

Re: Clojure.spec, maps, restrict valid keywords, easier way?

Ugh, don't do that. Introducing layers that add no value is a bad idea. Just use the keyword directly. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members

Re: Clojure.spec, maps, restrict valid keywords, easier way?

Keyword literals are inherently misspellable and trying to solve that problem with Spec does not really hit the nail on the head. But there is a solution: You do not have to use keyword literals very much! Instead of using, say, :egg/thunder throughout your program, def a var as :egg/thunder

Re: Clojure.spec, maps, restrict valid keywords, easier way?

Hello Alex, The idea is (as I understand it) that every function should accept any map and pick keys which it understands. If some keys are critical, then they should be marked as such in the spec. Function might iterate over keys and raise an error if there are keys which belong to the

Re: Clojure.spec, maps, restrict valid keywords, easier way?

On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 10:07:31 AM UTC-5, Alex Miller wrote: > > We don't encourage you to do this, but I don't have an easier solution > than this. > Yes, and from the general standpoint of map handling I understand that. >From the standpoint of functions that take options and don't

Re: Clojure.spec, maps, restrict valid keywords, easier way?

We don't encourage you to do this, but I don't have an easier solution than this. On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 7:05:37 AM UTC-6, Dave Tenny wrote: > > I want to specify in clojure spec that only declared keywords are > permitted in function calls. > This is to catch what are usually