🚩 Add strict flag
#42
Conversation
|
@josephg / @nornagon can you please check you're happy with this API? I've nested the flag inside an The one thing I'm unsure about in this PR is making |
This change adds a `strict` flag to control whether we have the stricter type checking introduced in ottypes#40 Strict mode will be off by default (to maintain compatibility with old `json0` versions). In order to add this flag, we also add a new `options` object to the `type`. Strict mode is enabled on the type by setting the flag: ```js type.options.strict = true ``` Note that `text0` will share the same options as `json0` (ie enabling strict mode for `json0` also enables it for `text0`). In this change we also tidy up some unused utility functions from a previous commit.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hm... I don't love this, for a couple of reasons.
- It's not obvious with this API how to mix strict-mode and not-strict-mode in the same process. Granted, that's possibly an odd requirement, but e.g. it would preclude migrating data one "area" at a time.
- "strict" mode ought to be the default.
Might it make sense, rather than having the notion of a "strict" mode, to simply push the stricter requirements with a semver/major bump?
|
Sure, I'm all for a v2 release. Was just trying to give the option of backwards compatibility if you wanted it. If we're breaking things, can we also look at merging #23 ? |
|
I agree with @nornagon's concerns. And yeah, I'd be happy to merge #23 as well if thats the road we're taking. I'm concerned about how the type should be named / registered. Is it "json0" still or "json0v2"? I think the former makes more sense, but I can imagine running into issues when loading old operations which don't conform to the new rules or have missing deleted data. |
|
@josephg I've already run into these issues in share/sharedb#494 — I'm hoping to discuss them later today at the ShareDB PR meeting. I'm personally leaning towards renaming the type when we make a breaking change, so that you can register both versions separately (or we need to come up some way of adding semver to the URI and parsing that — in the past I think we've discussed naming types like |
|
Closing this as per above discussion. |
|
@josephg / @nornagon I just discussed with @ericyhwang , and we think that it's best to just leave the URI the same, because:
|
Fixes #41
This change adds a
strictflag to control whether we have the strictertype checking introduced in #40
Strict mode will be off by default (to maintain compatibility with old
json0versions).In order to add this flag, we also add a new
optionsobject to thetype. Strict mode is enabled on the type by setting the flag:Note that
text0will share the same options asjson0(ie enablingstrict mode for
json0also enables it fortext0).In this change we also tidy up some unused utility functions from a
previous commit.