You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hi, I recently started using Papr in one of my projects and so far I've been liking it a lot! But recently I came across an issue: the project is an API built with Fastify, and I use TypeBox as a validator, which infers optional properties as prop?: <type>, whereas Papr infers optional properties as prop?: <type> | undefined, this union type makes assigning a Papr document to a Fastify response schema when using TypeBox as a type provider impossible without extra work.
Is there a recommended way to handle something like this? The only two workarounds I've found is to define an optional property as a union with undefined at the validator level (allowing explicitly passing an undefined as a value), which seems very hacky, and disabling ts-config's exactOptionalPropertyTypes, which I guess is not too bad but still, if theres an option which doesn't involve touching the compiler's settings it would be perfect. Thanks in advance, and great work btw!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi, I recently started using Papr in one of my projects and so far I've been liking it a lot! But recently I came across an issue: the project is an API built with Fastify, and I use TypeBox as a validator, which infers optional properties as
prop?: <type>
, whereas Papr infers optional properties asprop?: <type> | undefined
, this union type makes assigning a Papr document to a Fastify response schema when using TypeBox as a type provider impossible without extra work.Is there a recommended way to handle something like this? The only two workarounds I've found is to define an optional property as a union with undefined at the validator level (allowing explicitly passing an
undefined
as a value), which seems very hacky, and disabling ts-config'sexactOptionalPropertyTypes
, which I guess is not too bad but still, if theres an option which doesn't involve touching the compiler's settings it would be perfect. Thanks in advance, and great work btw!The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: