feat: standard schema for validation

[florian-lefebvre]

What does this PR do?

Allows using Standard Schema compatible libraries for validate(). Discussed on Discord.

Docs PR: bombshell-dev/docs#42

Type of change

• Bug fix
• Feature
• Refactor (no behavior change)
• Documentation
• Performance improvement
• Tests
• Chore (dependencies, CI, tooling)

Checklist

• pnpm test passes (or targeted tests for my change)
• pnpm format has been run
• I have added/updated tests for my changes (if applicable)
• I have added a changeset

AI-generated code disclosure

• This PR includes AI-generated code

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: f1419b5

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 2 packages

Name	Type
@clack/prompts	Minor
@clack/core	Minor

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[pkg-pr-new]

• @example/basic

• @example/changesets

  npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@clack/core@543
  

  npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@clack/prompts@543
  

commit: f1419b5

[ghostdevv]

the jsdoc comments above the validate options would need updating, as well as the docs https://github.com/bombshell-dev/docs/

[natemoo-re]

Code looks great, changeset is perfect, just minor feedback on the example!

[florian-lefebvre]

I also want to note that the PR does not support schema transforms (they will run but not be used). That would require more changes to represent input and output in types. Out of scope of this PR but if you're interested let me know!

[florian-lefebvre]

@ghostdevv docs PR is available at bombshell-dev/docs#42

[ghostdevv]

Also, this would be breaking right?

[florian-lefebvre]

@43081j yeah I was also hesitating. I inlined it, the spec says it's absolutely fine

[florian-lefebvre]

Also, this would be breaking right?

@ghostdevv by "this", are you referring to input/output/transforms or this PR?

[ghostdevv]

Also, this would be breaking right?

@ghostdevv by "this", are you referring to input/output/transforms or this PR?

Yea, as this PR changes the behavior of the validate option

[florian-lefebvre]

I'm not sure it's fully breaking. No change as a user but it's true that if you are dealing with lower level APIs like in the date prompt, then it requires changes. So maybe it's a major for core and a minor for prompts

[ghostdevv]

I'm not sure it's fully breaking. No change as a user but it's true that if you are dealing with lower level APIs like in the date prompt, then it requires changes. So maybe it's a major for core and a minor for prompts

Ah, I'm so sorry but I missed the fact that the old behavior is still available 🤦‍♀️

[43081j]

technically, we can strip the standard schema types down to only the parts we use too. but i'm happy either way.

inlining it is better than pulling a dependency still

[florian-lefebvre]

I just checked and very little can be stripped, only InferInput and InferOutput. So I'd say it's worth leaving it as is

[ghostdevv]

last thing 😄 otherwise lgtm

[dreyfus92]

thank you @florian-lefebvre 💜