When dealing with an optional boolean parameter, string literals like #{"1" "y" "yes" "on" "true"}) treated as true while #{"0" "n" "no" "off" "false"}) as false and nil for others.
i wrote a function named as-bool to coerce boolean literal refer to Destructuring-Syntax#parameter-coercion , while schema (s/maybe s/Bool) validates the parameter.
Failed the coercion when data binding if the boolean parameter isn't presented and route entirely as per wiki, there is no chance for schema validation comes to play.
Is it more reasonable to accept nil value at data binding and hand route flow over to schema validation at data validating?
When dealing with an optional boolean parameter, string literals like #{"1" "y" "yes" "on" "true"}) treated as true while #{"0" "n" "no" "off" "false"}) as false and nil for others.
i wrote a function named as-bool to coerce boolean literal refer to Destructuring-Syntax#parameter-coercion , while schema (s/maybe s/Bool) validates the parameter.
Failed the coercion when data binding if the boolean parameter isn't presented and route entirely as per wiki, there is no chance for schema validation comes to play.
Is it more reasonable to accept nil value at data binding and hand route flow over to schema validation at data validating?