Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

upkeep: improve output validation in format_scenarios_for_p4b.R #59

Open
jacobvjk opened this issue May 29, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

upkeep: improve output validation in format_scenarios_for_p4b.R #59

jacobvjk opened this issue May 29, 2024 · 1 comment
Labels
upkeep maintenance, infrastructure, and similar

Comments

@jacobvjk
Copy link
Member

as mentioned here #58
output validation could be improved.
open: does it make sense to add functions to pacta.data.validation package or should they go directly into the format_p4b and format_p4b_ei functions?
I would tend to add mostly type checks, as the levels are implicitly already checked in the scenario preparation step

@jacobvjk jacobvjk added the upkeep maintenance, infrastructure, and similar label May 29, 2024
@jacobvjk jacobvjk changed the title upkeep: improve output validation in format_scenarios_for_p4b.R upkeep: improve output validation in format_scenarios_for_p4b.R May 29, 2024
@cjyetman
Copy link
Member

I see two options:

  1. do proper validation of whatever is necessary in the code that exports them
  2. add a validate_p4b_scenario_data() type function to pact.data.validation

honestly, probably both are legitimate and worthwhile, though option 2 could possibly serve both purposes

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
upkeep maintenance, infrastructure, and similar
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants