Add configurable rule for strict string definitions

[adamaltman]

Strict string length definitions

Make sure that there is a min and max length defined on every string except for enums.

Resolved

See the history of this rule

I need help with this rule because it doesn't work as expected.

To execute the rule I need the same object in two where clauses, and our documentation is unclear if this is allowed or not.

    where: 
      - subject: 
          type: Schema
          property: type
        assertions:  
          const: string
      - subject: 
          type: Schema
          property: enum
        assertions: 
          defined: false        

The where object is part of a where list which must be defined in order from the root node. Nodes may be skipped in between the subject node types of the where list and those defined in the root subject type.

https://redocly.com/docs/cli/rules/configurable-rules/#where-object

It doesn't state if you can use the same node twice. If I can't, how do I accomplish this rule?

[tatomyr]

@adamaltman a node cannot be used twice in the where object. This is a restriction of current implementation.

how do I accomplish this rule?

There are several options to this, e.g. you can define a custom function (in a plugin) which will combine the two assertions into one, or you can try 'moving' one of the checks into the actual assertion (depends on the behaviour you're trying to achieve).
Writing a custom rule is also always an option. And lastly, we can try rewriting the core logic that doesn't allow to reuse the nodes (but I suspect that the restriction was implemented intentionally).

What the rule should do?

[adamaltman]

It should make sure all strings have minLength and maxLength defined unless they have an enum defined.

[tatomyr]

Could you try if something like this works for you?

  rule/string-schemas:
    where: 
      - subject: 
          type: Schema
          property: type
        assertions:  
          const: string
    subject: 
      type: Schema
    assertions: 
      requireAny: 
        - minLength
        - maxLength
        - enum
      mutuallyRequired: 
        - minLength
        - maxLength

[adamaltman]

This does work. (Maybe I'll some more test cases first before we declare victory. 😆 )

[tatomyr]

Left a minor comment.

[tatomyr]

Albeit it's correct, the opposite order seems more natural to me. I think it's easier to read if the top-level subject and assertions are grouped together and the where lies above or or below. What do you think?

[lornajane]

Nice addition!