[erlang-questions] Deputy: Type Conversion and Validation

Robert Virding <>
Tue Apr 10 00:07:39 CEST 2012


Why on earth would you want to make ok/false (or perhaps you mean ok/error) synonymous with true/false? They mean completely different things and tell different things so they should not be synonymous.

Robert

----- Original Message -----
> I like the idea of making true/false synonymous with ok/false. I'm
> not
> sure wrapping the fun handler with a try/catch clause is the right
> thing to do though, in that case I believe it should be left as a
> programming error.
> 
> I fixed the readme to reflect your comments, though I have not
> bothered to actually test whats in the readme which is horrible I
> know!
> 
> Maybe later this week I'll do both! Thank you for the comments.
> 
> Tom
> 
> 
> On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Ladislav Lenart <>
> wrote:
> > Hello.
> >
> > Nice little work :-)
> >
> > Just a few notes:
> > * Documentation typo in Proplist Usage - Rules is defined but later
> >  RuleSet is used.
> > * Documentation about Addon Type Conversion seems unfinished.
> > * Why the advanced API needs to be exported at all?
> > * I would modify interface of convert/2 to either:
> >  * return the result value directly | raise an error,
> >  * use tagged tuples {ok, Value} | error.
> > * I think check/3 returns errors in reversed order when stop is
> > used.
> > * I would suggest to extend (both) {func,...} to
> >
> >      check_rule(Value, {func, Fun}) when is_function(Fun, 1) ->
> >          try
> >              Fun(Value)
> >          catch
> >              _:_ ->
> >                  error
> >          end;
> >
> >  This will enable you to write shorter rules. Instead of
> >
> >      Test = fun (Value) ->
> >          case Value > 1 andalso Value < 10 of
> >              true -> ok;
> >              false -> error
> >          end
> >      end
> >
> >  you will be able to write
> >
> >      Test = fun (Value) -> true = Value > 1 andalso Value < 10, ok
> >      end
> >
> >  or (in a different style)
> >
> >      Test = fun (Value) ->
> >          true = Value > 1,
> >          true = Value < 10,
> >          ok
> >      end
> >
> >  and if you allow true as synonym for ok and false as synonym for
> >  error,
> >  you can omit ok at the end.
> >
> >
> > HTH,
> >
> > Ladislav Lenart
> >
> >
> >
> > On 3.4.2012 19:12, Tom Burdick wrote:
> >>
> >> After not finding a validation/conversion library I felt worked
> >> well
> >> for what I wanted (REST interface) I made my own.
> >>
> >> Would greatly appreciate any feedback!
> >>
> >> http://github.com/treetopllc/deputy
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >> Tom
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> erlang-questions mailing list
> >> 
> >> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> >>
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> 
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> 



More information about the erlang-questions mailing list