can `optional()` be used with a thunk?

I want to do something like this (to allow null values to be ignored):

export const mod = scope({
    Nested: {
        something: "boolean",
    },
    Model: {
        field: () => mod.type("Nested").or(type.null.pipe(() => undefined)).optional(),
        other: "string",
    },
});

export const mod = scope({
    Nested: {
        something: "boolean",
    },
    Model: {
        field: () => mod.type("Nested").or(type.null.pipe(() => undefined)).optional(),
        other: "string",
    },
});

But I get the error: Type definitions must be strings or objects (was Function) I am needing to use a thunk because in my real case I am using a type defined within the scope. But maybe there's another way of achieving that?

4 Replies

ssalbdivad•2w ago

Could you just use a normal optional key like "field?"

TomOP•2w ago

yeah, sort of. I was doing that originally, but started getting An unordered union of a type including a morph and a type with overlapping input is indeterminate. But now I think about it, I suspect I would probably get the same issue even with .optional()?

ssalbdivad•2w ago

Yeah they're functionally identical

TomOP•2w ago

I haven't managed to reduce this down to a simple example yet, maybe I'll do that so I can understand what's going on

Gaming

Programming

can `optional()` be used with a thunk?

Did you find this page helpful?