JSON schemas are great. I think that schema validation tools give you the ability to validate stuff that are usually pretty hard, or just redundant.
The thing that's a bit harder to do with schema validations is integrating them as a part of your feature logic, for example validating a specific field upon interaction. Another thing that can be annoying is dealing with warn only validations (does a medium strength password match, or not match the schema, then? How do you know to present a warning there?).
Schemas are mostly useful when you want to validate your whole form at once (upon submit, for example). Validating as the user types is a bit of a hassle.
It is possible, though, to use both vest and the schema validation library of your choice. You are not coupled to enforce as your assertion library. You can base your validations on anything that either throws an error, or explicitly returns false for an invalid test - so whatever you're using now, you can keep using it within vest.
Thanks :)
The intention is not flexibility (took me a while to realize flexibility isn't always a good thing), but to allow easy migration of existing validation logic. Validations are usually boolean based, so this helps with that.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
JSON schemas are great. I think that schema validation tools give you the ability to validate stuff that are usually pretty hard, or just redundant.
The thing that's a bit harder to do with schema validations is integrating them as a part of your feature logic, for example validating a specific field upon interaction. Another thing that can be annoying is dealing with warn only validations (does a medium strength password match, or not match the schema, then? How do you know to present a warning there?).
Schemas are mostly useful when you want to validate your whole form at once (upon submit, for example). Validating as the user types is a bit of a hassle.
It is possible, though, to use both vest and the schema validation library of your choice. You are not coupled to enforce as your assertion library. You can base your validations on anything that either throws an error, or explicitly returns false for an invalid test - so whatever you're using now, you can keep using it within vest.
man thanks a lot that is really helpful perspective, esp. re useful for validating a whole form vs specific fields!
"You can base your validations on anything that either throws an error, or explicitly returns false" sounds really flexible :)
Thanks :)
The intention is not flexibility (took me a while to realize flexibility isn't always a good thing), but to allow easy migration of existing validation logic. Validations are usually boolean based, so this helps with that.