Because of how the validation engine works now [1], there's no reason to
keep adding names to each rule. Instead, create a single rule that
handles naming rules with a few other accessories. This change is not
necessarily simple, but it shrinks the `Rule` interface, and it's more
aligned with how the library works right now.
Personally, I think this API is much more straightforward than the
`setName()` method, as it's way more explicit about which rule we're
naming. Because of this change, the behaviour changed slightly, but it's
for the best.
Because of this change, I managed to remove a lot of code, but
unfortunately, it's quite a big-bang commit. It would be too complicated
to make it atomic since names are an intrinsic part of the library.
[1]: 238f2d506a
Because of how the validation engine works, there's no reason to keep
adding templates to each rule. Instead, creating a single rule that
handles templating rules will simplify the library greatly and shrink
the `Rule` interface.
Personally, I think this API is much more straightforward than the
`setTemplate()` method, as it's way more explicit which rule is being
templated.
Besides the interface's name, everything already calls this type "Rule",
not "Validatable." This commit puts a stone on it and renames the
interface for better naming.
After many refactorings, no rules use the previous validation engine.
That means we can remove the unused code from the repository and switch
from the previous to the new validation engine everywhere.
This commit will also soft deprecate the methods "validate()", and
"check()" in all the rules and the "assert()" in all rules but the
Validator itself. That means using those methods will still be allowed,
but static analysis tools might complain.
This is a big step toward releasing the next major version, as the code
is pretty much the way it should be when I release the next version.
There's some documentation to be updated, and I would like to change the
behavior of a couple of rules.
Signed-off-by: Henrique Moody <henriquemoody@gmail.com>
There are a few "problems" with the current engine:
- Allowing each rule to execute assert() and check() means duplication
in some cases.
- Because we use exceptions to assert/check, we can only invert a
validation (with Not) if there are errors. That means that we have
limited granularity control.
- There is a lot of logic in the exceptions. That means that even after
it throws an exception, something could still happen. We're stable on
that front, but I want to simplify them. Besides, debugging exception
code is painful because the stack trace does not go beyond the
exception.
Apart from that, there are many limitations with templating, and working
that out in the current implementation makes it much harder.
These changes will improve the library in many aspects, but they will
also change the behavior and break backward compatibility. However,
that's a price I'm willing to pay for the improvements we'll have.
Signed-off-by: Henrique Moody <henriquemoody@gmail.com>
