Validate Promise API

[MichalLytek]

I like this library but the API could be better. I'm talking about this:

validate(post).then(errors => { // errors is an array of validation errors
    if (errors.length > 0) {
        console.log("validation failed. errors: ", errors);
    } else {
        console.log("validation succeed");
    }
});

It would be better if the validate() reject promise on errors. To do that, this line should be replaced with:

const errors = executor.stripEmptyErrors(validationErrors);
return errors.length ? Promise.reject(errors) : Promise.resolve();

Then we simply work with validate() in async&await:

try {
    await validate(post);
    console.log("validation succeed");
} catch (errors) {
    console.log("validation failed. errors: ", errors);
}

And if you don't want to handle the errors (like in routing-controllers), you can just simply do that and it will throw error on errors:

await validate(post);
await postRepository.persist(post);
...

What do you think about this? It might be a breaking change, so you should publish this as a major version (to prevent auto update on npm install for older users) or we have to create a new name for the validate function with promise rejection behavior.

[pleerock]

actually I had almost same method before, its called validateAndThrow, but then I removed it because didn't want "double-behaviour". I like this async/await syntax more then array of errors. But since its too serious breaking change its better to add extra method instead. Maybe in next major version (1.0.0) we will replace validate method with new behaviour. (maybe we need to create a separate issue where we track everything we want to publish in next major version, and once we are ready and feel confident with all new changes, and be sure that there are no other breaking changes in a near feature - we'll publish a new major version)

[MichalLytek]

It can be validateAndThrow, thanks to ES6 desctructive import it's easy to do this:

import { validateAndThrow as validate } from "class-validator";

It's easier than creating the new function with name validate and exporting it in subdirectory like:

import { validate } from "class-validator/validation/throw";

actually I had almost same method before

Can you restore it from git history or should I do the PR?

[pleerock]

Can you restore it from git history or should I do the PR?

its easier to make same changes again. Also I don't like validateAndThrow name, maybe you have something better in mind?

[Salimlou]

Benabbou Salim.

Le 16 oct. 2016 à 08:56, 19majkel94 notifications@github.com a écrit :

It can be validateAndThrow, thanks to ES6 desctructive import it's easy to do this:

import { validateAndThrow as validate } from "class-validator";
It's easier than creating the new function with name validate and exporting it in subdirectory like:

import { validate } from "class-validator/validation/throw";
actually I had almost same method before

Can you restore it from git history or should I do the PR?

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[pleerock]

hi @Salimlou 😃

[Salimlou]

Haha sorry about that :)!!

Benabbou Salim.

Le 16 oct. 2016 à 09:33, Umed Khudoiberdiev notifications@github.com a écrit :

hi @Salimlou 😃

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[MichalLytek]

Also I don't like validateAndThrow name, maybe you have something better in mind?

Hmmm... restrictedValidate? 😜 Restricted because it throw error and you have to catch them, in normal validate you can ignore errors or just print on console and go on without catch.

[pleerock]

nooo don't like either

[MichalLytek]

its easier to make same changes again

Done in #43 . However it violate the DRY so it would be better to refactor the common code to private method and call it in the public API.