Add asynchronous validation support

[pashoo2]

Please look at my fork https://github.com/pashoo2/jsen and add my code into the yours, if you'll like it. I've not understood how to create a pull request

[bugventure]

@pashoo2 Nice work adding async support in your fork. However, as the primary goal of JSEN is performance, async validation is not in the scope of the project. Further, I believe that true async execution in a JSON validation library is achieved only if validation can be performed on a separate thread.

Also, looking at the code, you've implemented async support only for custom formats. The rest of the validation code will not run asynchronously. In this case, async execution seems more of a convenience feature for dealing with asynchronous format validation that may involve async I/O.

[pashoo2]

Yes, but even this implementation of the asynchronous validation may help to many peoples like me, and it have another features

[pashoo2]

I've compared the performance of my fork and your code. It seems to be on a par

[pashoo2]

And the async validation may be the main benefit of this library against the library is-my-json-valid

[bugventure]

We need more use cases for that and additional research on the optimal approach for asynchronous execution. I'm adding this as a planned feature for v0.4.0, but want to hear more voices here.

[pashoo2]

You have the bug with a custom patterns and the predefined formats:

var jsen = require("jsen");

var obj1 = { date : 2 };

var schema = { type : "object", additionalProperties : false, required : ["date"], properties : { date : { format : "email" } } };

var validator = jsen(schema); var res = validator(obj1); console.log(res);

[pashoo2]

I've fixed this error with the 0.4.2 release

[pashoo2]

Another bug with a custom formats, it's may be not only a strings

[pashoo2]

Also fixed

[bugventure]

Can you, please, provide more details for these two bugs? In the first case, I can't see anything wrong with the validation. obj1 is valid, because you don't specify a type for the date field. According to the JSON schema spec, keywords that do not apply to a particular type are ignored and validation succeeds. In this case, the format keyword is ignored as it only applies to strings.

[pashoo2]

I don't know these details about the first error, after your explanation i think it's not an error. The second error, as i remember, is that if a value has a non-string type, then it will be ignored for the custom validation function, that was defined by a custom format

[pashoo2]

Ok, if it is a standard behaviour, that a schema without a specified type ignores the format keyword, then there is no errors

[bugventure]

Custom formats are different. They are run for all types (I have a test that covers this scenario). Note, however, that custom format validators are run after all built-in keyword validators pass successfully. This means if validation fails on any of the built-in keywords, custom format validators won't run.

[pashoo2]

Yes, it is. But in my test, custom formats have been applied only for string properties. I've done this to resolve the problem:

function getGenerators(schema) {
    var keys = Object.keys(schema),
        start = [],
        perType = {},
        gen, i;

    for (i = 0; i < keys.length; i++) {
        gen = keywords[keys[i]];

        if (!gen) {
            continue;
        }

        //pashoo--
        if ( keys[i] === "format"  && formats[schema.format] === undefined ) { //if it is a custom format
            continue;
        } //--pashoo

        if (gen.type) {
            if (!perType[gen.type]) {
                perType[gen.type] = [];
            }

            perType[gen.type].push(gen);
        }
        else {
            start.push(gen);
        }
    }

    return start.concat(Object.keys(perType).reduce(function (arr, key) {
        return arr.concat(perType[key]);
    }, []));
}

[pashoo2]

Another issue:

var obj = {
    _fl1 : true,
    _m : [
        {
            t: "22",
            k: "22",
            b : 2
        },
        {
            t: "23",
            k "22",
            b : {a:1, b:2}
        }
    ]
};
var schema = {
            type: "object",
            additionalProperties : false,
        required : ["_fl1", "_m"],
            properties: {
                _fl1: {"enum": [true]},
                _messages: {
                    type: "array",
                    additionalItems : false,
                    items:{
                            type: "object",
                            additionalProperties : false,
                            required : ["t","k","b"],
                            properties: {
                                t: {type: "string", minLength : 1, maxLength: 50},
                                k: {type: "string", minLength : 1, maxLength: 50},
                                b: {
                                    oneOf:[
                                        {type:"object", maxProperties: 50, minProperties: 1},
                                        {type:"number"}
                                    ]
                                }
                            }
                        }
                }
            }
        };
var validator = jsen(schema);
var res = validator(obj);

[bugventure]

You use _messages in the schema, but _m in the validated object.

[pashoo2]

oh, sorry, you need to change messages to m into the schema, and the result will be wrong. I've added async validation for the oneOf keyword. This means that it is possible and easy for all other keywords

[seeden]

+1 for async validation