dry-struct How to conditionally validate one attribute?










0














I'm using dry-types and dry-struct and I would like to have a conditional validation.



for the class:



class Tax < Dry::Struct
attribute :tax_type, Types::String.constrained(min_size: 2, max_size: 3, included_in: %w[IVA IS NS])
attribute :tax_country_region, Types::String.constrained(max_size: 5)
attribute :tax_code, Types::String.constrained(max_size: 10)
attribute :description, Types::String.constrained(max_size: 255)
attribute :tax_percentage, Types::Integer
attribute :tax_ammount, Types::Integer.optional
end


I want to validate tax_ammount as an Integer and mandatory if `tax_type == 'IS'.










share|improve this question


























    0














    I'm using dry-types and dry-struct and I would like to have a conditional validation.



    for the class:



    class Tax < Dry::Struct
    attribute :tax_type, Types::String.constrained(min_size: 2, max_size: 3, included_in: %w[IVA IS NS])
    attribute :tax_country_region, Types::String.constrained(max_size: 5)
    attribute :tax_code, Types::String.constrained(max_size: 10)
    attribute :description, Types::String.constrained(max_size: 255)
    attribute :tax_percentage, Types::Integer
    attribute :tax_ammount, Types::Integer.optional
    end


    I want to validate tax_ammount as an Integer and mandatory if `tax_type == 'IS'.










    share|improve this question
























      0












      0








      0







      I'm using dry-types and dry-struct and I would like to have a conditional validation.



      for the class:



      class Tax < Dry::Struct
      attribute :tax_type, Types::String.constrained(min_size: 2, max_size: 3, included_in: %w[IVA IS NS])
      attribute :tax_country_region, Types::String.constrained(max_size: 5)
      attribute :tax_code, Types::String.constrained(max_size: 10)
      attribute :description, Types::String.constrained(max_size: 255)
      attribute :tax_percentage, Types::Integer
      attribute :tax_ammount, Types::Integer.optional
      end


      I want to validate tax_ammount as an Integer and mandatory if `tax_type == 'IS'.










      share|improve this question













      I'm using dry-types and dry-struct and I would like to have a conditional validation.



      for the class:



      class Tax < Dry::Struct
      attribute :tax_type, Types::String.constrained(min_size: 2, max_size: 3, included_in: %w[IVA IS NS])
      attribute :tax_country_region, Types::String.constrained(max_size: 5)
      attribute :tax_code, Types::String.constrained(max_size: 10)
      attribute :description, Types::String.constrained(max_size: 255)
      attribute :tax_percentage, Types::Integer
      attribute :tax_ammount, Types::Integer.optional
      end


      I want to validate tax_ammount as an Integer and mandatory if `tax_type == 'IS'.







      ruby dry-rb dry-types dry-struct






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked Nov 12 '18 at 20:54









      Paulo Fidalgo

      15.9k66493




      15.9k66493






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          4














          dry-struct is really for basic type assertion and coercion.



          If you want more complex validation then you probably want to implement dry-validation as well (as recommended by dry-rb)



          See Validating data with dry-struct which states




          Please don’t. Structs are meant to work with valid input, it cannot generate error messages good enough for displaying them for a user etc. Use dry-validation for validating incoming data and then pass its output to structs.




          The conditional validation using dry-validation would be something like



          TaxValidation = Dry::Validation.Schema do

          # Could be:
          # required(:tax_type).filled(:str?,
          # size?: 2..3,
          # included_in?: %w(IVA IS NS))
          # but since we are validating against a list of Strings I figured the rest was implied
          required(:tax_type).filled(included_in?: %w(IVA IS NS))
          optional(:tax_amount).maybe(:int?)

          # rule name is of your choosing and will be used
          # as the errors key (i just chose `tax_amount` for consistency)
          rule(tax_amount:[:tax_type, :tax_amount]) do |tax_type, tax_amount|
          tax_type.eql?('IS').then(tax_amount.filled?)
          end
          end


          • This requires tax_type to be in the %w(IVA IS NS) list;

          • Allows tax_amount to be optional but if it is filled in it must be an Integer (int?) and;

          • If tax_type == 'IS' (eql?('IS')) then tax_amount must be filled in (which means it must be an Integer based on the rule above).

          Obviously you can validate your other inputs as well but I left these out for the sake of brevity.



          Examples:



          TaxValidation.().success?
          #=> false
          TaxValidation.().errors
          # => :tax_type=>["is missing"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NO').errors
          #=> :tax_type=>["must be one of: IVA, IS, NS"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NS').errors
          #=>
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'IS').errors
          #=> :tax_amount=>["must be filled"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'IS',tax_amount:'NO').errors
          #=> :tax_amount=>["must be an integer"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NS',tax_amount:12).errors
          #=>
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NS',tax_amount:12).success?
          #=> true





          share|improve this answer






















          • Even knowing that dry-struct is not meant to use as validator, for the most cases I have (data mapping between the database and XML) is fit's perfectly, as it's simple and efective. For more complex cases, your sugestion works fine, thank you.
            – Paulo Fidalgo
            Nov 13 '18 at 15:26










          Your Answer






          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
          StackExchange.snippets.init();
          );
          );
          , "code-snippets");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "1"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53269946%2fdry-struct-how-to-conditionally-validate-one-attribute%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          4














          dry-struct is really for basic type assertion and coercion.



          If you want more complex validation then you probably want to implement dry-validation as well (as recommended by dry-rb)



          See Validating data with dry-struct which states




          Please don’t. Structs are meant to work with valid input, it cannot generate error messages good enough for displaying them for a user etc. Use dry-validation for validating incoming data and then pass its output to structs.




          The conditional validation using dry-validation would be something like



          TaxValidation = Dry::Validation.Schema do

          # Could be:
          # required(:tax_type).filled(:str?,
          # size?: 2..3,
          # included_in?: %w(IVA IS NS))
          # but since we are validating against a list of Strings I figured the rest was implied
          required(:tax_type).filled(included_in?: %w(IVA IS NS))
          optional(:tax_amount).maybe(:int?)

          # rule name is of your choosing and will be used
          # as the errors key (i just chose `tax_amount` for consistency)
          rule(tax_amount:[:tax_type, :tax_amount]) do |tax_type, tax_amount|
          tax_type.eql?('IS').then(tax_amount.filled?)
          end
          end


          • This requires tax_type to be in the %w(IVA IS NS) list;

          • Allows tax_amount to be optional but if it is filled in it must be an Integer (int?) and;

          • If tax_type == 'IS' (eql?('IS')) then tax_amount must be filled in (which means it must be an Integer based on the rule above).

          Obviously you can validate your other inputs as well but I left these out for the sake of brevity.



          Examples:



          TaxValidation.().success?
          #=> false
          TaxValidation.().errors
          # => :tax_type=>["is missing"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NO').errors
          #=> :tax_type=>["must be one of: IVA, IS, NS"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NS').errors
          #=>
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'IS').errors
          #=> :tax_amount=>["must be filled"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'IS',tax_amount:'NO').errors
          #=> :tax_amount=>["must be an integer"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NS',tax_amount:12).errors
          #=>
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NS',tax_amount:12).success?
          #=> true





          share|improve this answer






















          • Even knowing that dry-struct is not meant to use as validator, for the most cases I have (data mapping between the database and XML) is fit's perfectly, as it's simple and efective. For more complex cases, your sugestion works fine, thank you.
            – Paulo Fidalgo
            Nov 13 '18 at 15:26















          4














          dry-struct is really for basic type assertion and coercion.



          If you want more complex validation then you probably want to implement dry-validation as well (as recommended by dry-rb)



          See Validating data with dry-struct which states




          Please don’t. Structs are meant to work with valid input, it cannot generate error messages good enough for displaying them for a user etc. Use dry-validation for validating incoming data and then pass its output to structs.




          The conditional validation using dry-validation would be something like



          TaxValidation = Dry::Validation.Schema do

          # Could be:
          # required(:tax_type).filled(:str?,
          # size?: 2..3,
          # included_in?: %w(IVA IS NS))
          # but since we are validating against a list of Strings I figured the rest was implied
          required(:tax_type).filled(included_in?: %w(IVA IS NS))
          optional(:tax_amount).maybe(:int?)

          # rule name is of your choosing and will be used
          # as the errors key (i just chose `tax_amount` for consistency)
          rule(tax_amount:[:tax_type, :tax_amount]) do |tax_type, tax_amount|
          tax_type.eql?('IS').then(tax_amount.filled?)
          end
          end


          • This requires tax_type to be in the %w(IVA IS NS) list;

          • Allows tax_amount to be optional but if it is filled in it must be an Integer (int?) and;

          • If tax_type == 'IS' (eql?('IS')) then tax_amount must be filled in (which means it must be an Integer based on the rule above).

          Obviously you can validate your other inputs as well but I left these out for the sake of brevity.



          Examples:



          TaxValidation.().success?
          #=> false
          TaxValidation.().errors
          # => :tax_type=>["is missing"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NO').errors
          #=> :tax_type=>["must be one of: IVA, IS, NS"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NS').errors
          #=>
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'IS').errors
          #=> :tax_amount=>["must be filled"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'IS',tax_amount:'NO').errors
          #=> :tax_amount=>["must be an integer"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NS',tax_amount:12).errors
          #=>
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NS',tax_amount:12).success?
          #=> true





          share|improve this answer






















          • Even knowing that dry-struct is not meant to use as validator, for the most cases I have (data mapping between the database and XML) is fit's perfectly, as it's simple and efective. For more complex cases, your sugestion works fine, thank you.
            – Paulo Fidalgo
            Nov 13 '18 at 15:26













          4












          4








          4






          dry-struct is really for basic type assertion and coercion.



          If you want more complex validation then you probably want to implement dry-validation as well (as recommended by dry-rb)



          See Validating data with dry-struct which states




          Please don’t. Structs are meant to work with valid input, it cannot generate error messages good enough for displaying them for a user etc. Use dry-validation for validating incoming data and then pass its output to structs.




          The conditional validation using dry-validation would be something like



          TaxValidation = Dry::Validation.Schema do

          # Could be:
          # required(:tax_type).filled(:str?,
          # size?: 2..3,
          # included_in?: %w(IVA IS NS))
          # but since we are validating against a list of Strings I figured the rest was implied
          required(:tax_type).filled(included_in?: %w(IVA IS NS))
          optional(:tax_amount).maybe(:int?)

          # rule name is of your choosing and will be used
          # as the errors key (i just chose `tax_amount` for consistency)
          rule(tax_amount:[:tax_type, :tax_amount]) do |tax_type, tax_amount|
          tax_type.eql?('IS').then(tax_amount.filled?)
          end
          end


          • This requires tax_type to be in the %w(IVA IS NS) list;

          • Allows tax_amount to be optional but if it is filled in it must be an Integer (int?) and;

          • If tax_type == 'IS' (eql?('IS')) then tax_amount must be filled in (which means it must be an Integer based on the rule above).

          Obviously you can validate your other inputs as well but I left these out for the sake of brevity.



          Examples:



          TaxValidation.().success?
          #=> false
          TaxValidation.().errors
          # => :tax_type=>["is missing"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NO').errors
          #=> :tax_type=>["must be one of: IVA, IS, NS"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NS').errors
          #=>
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'IS').errors
          #=> :tax_amount=>["must be filled"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'IS',tax_amount:'NO').errors
          #=> :tax_amount=>["must be an integer"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NS',tax_amount:12).errors
          #=>
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NS',tax_amount:12).success?
          #=> true





          share|improve this answer














          dry-struct is really for basic type assertion and coercion.



          If you want more complex validation then you probably want to implement dry-validation as well (as recommended by dry-rb)



          See Validating data with dry-struct which states




          Please don’t. Structs are meant to work with valid input, it cannot generate error messages good enough for displaying them for a user etc. Use dry-validation for validating incoming data and then pass its output to structs.




          The conditional validation using dry-validation would be something like



          TaxValidation = Dry::Validation.Schema do

          # Could be:
          # required(:tax_type).filled(:str?,
          # size?: 2..3,
          # included_in?: %w(IVA IS NS))
          # but since we are validating against a list of Strings I figured the rest was implied
          required(:tax_type).filled(included_in?: %w(IVA IS NS))
          optional(:tax_amount).maybe(:int?)

          # rule name is of your choosing and will be used
          # as the errors key (i just chose `tax_amount` for consistency)
          rule(tax_amount:[:tax_type, :tax_amount]) do |tax_type, tax_amount|
          tax_type.eql?('IS').then(tax_amount.filled?)
          end
          end


          • This requires tax_type to be in the %w(IVA IS NS) list;

          • Allows tax_amount to be optional but if it is filled in it must be an Integer (int?) and;

          • If tax_type == 'IS' (eql?('IS')) then tax_amount must be filled in (which means it must be an Integer based on the rule above).

          Obviously you can validate your other inputs as well but I left these out for the sake of brevity.



          Examples:



          TaxValidation.().success?
          #=> false
          TaxValidation.().errors
          # => :tax_type=>["is missing"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NO').errors
          #=> :tax_type=>["must be one of: IVA, IS, NS"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NS').errors
          #=>
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'IS').errors
          #=> :tax_amount=>["must be filled"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'IS',tax_amount:'NO').errors
          #=> :tax_amount=>["must be an integer"]
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NS',tax_amount:12).errors
          #=>
          TaxValidation.(tax_type: 'NS',tax_amount:12).success?
          #=> true






          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Nov 12 '18 at 23:02

























          answered Nov 12 '18 at 21:14









          engineersmnky

          13.2k12138




          13.2k12138











          • Even knowing that dry-struct is not meant to use as validator, for the most cases I have (data mapping between the database and XML) is fit's perfectly, as it's simple and efective. For more complex cases, your sugestion works fine, thank you.
            – Paulo Fidalgo
            Nov 13 '18 at 15:26
















          • Even knowing that dry-struct is not meant to use as validator, for the most cases I have (data mapping between the database and XML) is fit's perfectly, as it's simple and efective. For more complex cases, your sugestion works fine, thank you.
            – Paulo Fidalgo
            Nov 13 '18 at 15:26















          Even knowing that dry-struct is not meant to use as validator, for the most cases I have (data mapping between the database and XML) is fit's perfectly, as it's simple and efective. For more complex cases, your sugestion works fine, thank you.
          – Paulo Fidalgo
          Nov 13 '18 at 15:26




          Even knowing that dry-struct is not meant to use as validator, for the most cases I have (data mapping between the database and XML) is fit's perfectly, as it's simple and efective. For more complex cases, your sugestion works fine, thank you.
          – Paulo Fidalgo
          Nov 13 '18 at 15:26

















          draft saved

          draft discarded
















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





          Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


          Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53269946%2fdry-struct-how-to-conditionally-validate-one-attribute%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          這個網誌中的熱門文章

          How to read a connectionString WITH PROVIDER in .NET Core?

          In R, how to develop a multiplot heatmap.2 figure showing key labels successfully

          Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art of Trento and Rovereto