Conversation
|
This looks good! What are the blockers for integration? |
|
@cchepelov There still has some UT is not passed. And a newer version of TypeScript is required. I guess that is why this PR is not merged into master. I'm sorry I have not enough time and skill to fix all issue. If the feature is required for you, you can use another library I published to NPM ( io-ts-with-optional ) as a workaround. |
|
Thank you @colin-han! I'll see if I can get away with no optionals for the time being. It looks like io-ts' 3.0 branch is moving a bit, too. |
@cchepelov the active development of the next major iteration of io-ts (and more generally of the fp-ts ecosystem) is happening here |
|
@gcanti It looks like the new Schema system is powerful. Do you have consider to support optional syntax like mine? The current optional syntax ( |
|
@colin-han just landed in the development branch |
Based on the PR #654 , I'm trying to make a more readable solution to support optional properties of TypeScript.
I define a new keyword
t.optionalto annotate a properties is optional. The above declaration will generated type likes following:I borrow all UT from the PR #654 . Thanks to the author @mjburghoffer, your UT help me so many.
BTW, I don't known why I cannot pass all test (prettier and eslint) on my local environment. If it's a problem to merge this PR. let me known, I will take more research for it.