Skip to content
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

Report multiple type errors #5

Closed
sindresorhus opened this issue Oct 5, 2017 · 12 comments · Fixed by #192
Closed

Report multiple type errors #5

sindresorhus opened this issue Oct 5, 2017 · 12 comments · Fixed by #192
Labels
enhancement 🎁 Rewarded on Issuehunt This issue has been rewarded on Issuehunt help wanted

Comments

@sindresorhus
Copy link
Owner

sindresorhus commented Oct 5, 2017

Issuehunt badges

If an input has multiple errors, we should list them all so the user can fix it in one go.


IssueHunt Summary

vladfrangu vladfrangu has been rewarded.

Backers (Total: $60.00)

Submitted pull Requests


Tips

@sindresorhus sindresorhus changed the title Report multiple errors Report multiple type errors Oct 5, 2017
@SamVerschueren
Copy link
Collaborator

Have you thought about how we could do this? Should we create one ArgumentError with a list of error messages? Or should we create one ArgumentError per error and wrap it inside another error?

It's pretty straight forward to implement, we just have to come up with the best way of doing this :).

@sindresorhus
Copy link
Owner Author

The error is meant for humans, so I think it should just be a nicely formatted text list of error messages in the returned error.message.

@IssueHuntBot
Copy link

@issuehuntfest has funded $60.00 to this issue. See it on IssueHunt

@issuehunt-oss issuehunt-oss bot added the 💵 Funded on Issuehunt This issue has been funded on Issuehunt label May 10, 2019
@SamVerschueren
Copy link
Collaborator

I want to pick this one up as I need it :). Will try to assign some of my time to it.

@GentileFulvio
Copy link
Contributor

Any progress on this one ? @SamVerschueren are you still on this issue ? Seems like a nice feature and fun pretty fun to check it out. Question is do we want this as default behavior or should there be some config triggering this behavior ? It seems like a breaking change though if we default

@sindresorhus
Copy link
Owner Author

sindresorhus commented Oct 17, 2020

It should be the default. We can consider making it opt-out if someone complains.


Keep in mind: This issue has a bounty, so it's expected that the person working on this does a good effort on it.

@vladfrangu
Copy link
Contributor

Hey! I think I'll actually look into this tomorrow (and include a fix for that TODO 👀) if that's ok. Is anyone else working on this? If so, I don't wanna step over their work

@sindresorhus
Copy link
Owner Author

No one is working on this. Just know that this issue has a bounty, so it's expected that you to do a good effort and think through the problem thoroughly. Also tests and docs.

@issuehunt-oss
Copy link

issuehunt-oss bot commented Jan 8, 2021

@sindresorhus has rewarded $54.00 to @vladfrangu. See it on IssueHunt

  • 💰 Total deposit: $60.00
  • 🎉 Repository reward(0%): $0.00
  • 🔧 Service fee(10%): $6.00

@issuehunt-oss issuehunt-oss bot added 🎁 Rewarded on Issuehunt This issue has been rewarded on Issuehunt and removed 💵 Funded on Issuehunt This issue has been funded on Issuehunt labels Jan 8, 2021
@karlhorky
Copy link

Would it be possible to also report multiple errors if the object doesn't match?

Current behavior:

> ow({a: 2, b: 'a'}, ow.object.exactShape({a: ow.string, b: ow.number}))
Uncaught:
ArgumentError: Expected property `a` to be of type `string` but received type `number` in object
    at ow (/Users/k/p/courses/node_modules/ow/dist/index.js:29:28) {
  validationErrors: Map(1) {
    'object' => Set(1) {
      'Expected property `a` to be of type `string` but received type `number` in object'
    }
  }
}

> ow({a: '2', b: 'a'}, ow.object.exactShape({a: ow.string, b: ow.number}))
Uncaught:
ArgumentError: Expected property `b` to be of type `number` but received type `string` in object
    at ow (/Users/k/p/courses/node_modules/ow/dist/index.js:29:28) {
  validationErrors: Map(1) {
    'object' => Set(1) {
      'Expected property `b` to be of type `number` but received type `string` in object'
    }
  }
}

Suggested behavior:

> ow({a: 2, b: 'a'}, ow.object.exactShape({a: ow.string, b: ow.number}))
Uncaught:
ArgumentError: Expected property `a` to be of type `string` but received type `number` in object
Expected property `b` to be of type `number` but received type `string` in object
    at ow (/Users/k/p/courses/node_modules/ow/dist/index.js:29:28) {
  validationErrors: Map(1) {
    'object' => Set(2) {
      'Expected property `a` to be of type `string` but received type `number` in object',
      'Expected property `b` to be of type `number` but received type `string` in object'
    }
  }
}

Even nicer would be to get the errors back in the shape of the original object:

> ow({a: 2, b: 'a'}, ow.object.exactShape({a: ow.string, b: ow.number}))
Uncaught:
ArgumentError: Expected property `a` to be of type `string` but received type `number` in object
Expected property `b` to be of type `number` but received type `string` in object
    at ow (/Users/k/p/courses/node_modules/ow/dist/index.js:29:28) {
  validationErrors: Object {
      a: 'Expected property `a` to be of type `string` but received type `number` in object',
      b: 'Expected property `b` to be of type `number` but received type `string` in object'
  }
}

@sindresorhus
Copy link
Owner Author

It's in general better to open a new issue than to comment on old closed issues.

@karlhorky
Copy link

Definitely agree, just wanted to get the sentiment of the team before taking the effort to open a new issue.

But if it's preferred to have that discussion elsewhere, understood.

Created a new issue: #237

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement 🎁 Rewarded on Issuehunt This issue has been rewarded on Issuehunt help wanted
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

6 participants