merge-partially

merge-partially

mergePartially is a convenience method for overwriting only the values you want

• Design Goals
• Why would you want to use this:
  • First, let's try to write the flexible factory function without mergePartially
  • Now let's refactor using mergePartially
• Examples
• F.A.Q. / Troubleshooting
  • Why wouldn't I just use Object.assign or the spread operator?
  • I see lots of TypeScript stuff. Can I use this in JavaScript too?
  • What's the difference between .deep and .shallow?
  • Why is .shallow even necessary?
  • Why am I getting some error about never?
  • Why is my return type some strange error string?
• Contributions

Design Goals

• the resulting object will always be the same type/interface as the seed object
• it will always be “Typescript first” so you know the type definitions will not differ at runtime (like many of this library's competitors)
• all PRs should allow consumers of the library to feel confident to use this library in production and bullet-proof testing scenarios. High code-coverage percentages gaurantee this.

Why would you want to use this:

tl;dr: with mergePartially helps you fold objects together without overwriting the originals. You can have less brittle tests but with all the flexibility you need.

There are many use cases, but I find this function to be most useful in testing scenarios.

Context: Often times when creating a factory function for tests, you want to be able to create a function that

interface IUser {
  id: number;
  firstName: string;
  lastName: string;
  age: number;
}

function makeFakeUser(): IUser {
  return {
    id: 1,
    age: 42,
    firstName: 'John',
    lastName: 'Smith',
  };
}

But what happens when unit test #2 needs the firstName value to be different? If you change the hard-coded value inside of makeFakeUser, then you break unit test #1. So if you don't proceed carefully, then makeFakeUser is at risk of creating brittle tests!

A more flexible approach is provide default values and allow the user to provide their own values.

First, let's try to write the flexible factory function without mergePartially

Ugh this is gonna be long...

function makeFakeUser(overrides?: Partial<IUser>): IUser {
  const defaults = {
    id: 1,
    age: 42,
    firstName: 'John',
    lastName: 'Smith',
  };

  const result = {
    id: overrides && overrides.id !== undefined ? overrides.id : defaults.id,
    age: overrides && overrides.age !== undefined ? overrides.age : defaults.age,
    firstName: overrides && overrides.firstName !== undefined ? overrides.firstName : defaults.firstName,
    lastName: overrides && overrides.lastName !== undefined ? overrides.lastName : defaults.lastName,
  };

  return result;
}

Now let's refactor using mergePartially

Wow look how much fewer lines and characters we have to write to accomplish the same thing:

import { mergePartially, NestedPartial } from 'merge-partially';

function makeFakeUser(overrides?: NestedPartial<IUser>): IUser {
  return mergePartially.deep(
    {
      id: 1,
      age: 42,
      firstName: 'John',
      lastName: 'Smith',
    },
    overrides
  );
}

Examples

See the unit tests for various examples.

F.A.Q. / Troubleshooting

Why wouldn't I just use Object.assign or the spread operator?

These two functions have different goals. Object.assign can merge two different types into a combination type. mergePartially always returns the same type as the seed object. That's one of many reasons why mergePartially is safer than Object.assign.

I see lots of TypeScript stuff. Can I use this in JavaScript too?

Yes. Even though the examples are in TypeScript (since it helps to illustrate the problem that mergePartially solves), you can just remove the type annotations when using mergePartially.

What's the difference between .deep and .shallow?

• The main difference is that .deep allows you to pass multiple levels of partially supplied objects but .shallow only allows partial objects at the first level.
  • On a more technical level, .deep allows you to pass in NestedPartial<T> as where .shallow only accepts Partial<T>
• Both will always return the full object

For example:

interface ISeed {
  a: {
    b: {
      c: string;
      d: string;
    };
  };
}

const seed: ISeed = {
  a: {
    b: {
      c: 'c',
      d: 'd',
    },
  },
};

const deepResult = mergePartially.deep(seed, { a: { b: { d: 'new d' } } });
const shallowResult = mergePartially.shallow(seed, {
  a: {
    b: {
      c: 'I had to supply a value for c here but I did not have to supply it in .deep',
      d: 'new d',
    },
  },
});

Why is .shallow even necessary?

There are some data types that are "less-compatible" with the library and therefore require a workaround (click here for the description). It should be rare that you need to use .shallow, but you might prefer .shallow over .deep anyway for explicitness.

Why am I getting some error about never?

If you're seeing a Typescript error similar to "Type 'number' is not assignable to type 'never'" then you it's likely a case where you need to inform the function what the type is for your seed parameter. See this thread for a detailed answer and a fun description in how TypeScript works.

Why is my return type some strange error string?

In order to meet the design goals (see above), mergePartially proactively prevents certain data combinations. See this link for more information on the soluton: https://github.com/dgreene1/merge-partially/blob/master/whyShallowInstead.md

Contributions

PRs are welcome. To contribute, please either make a Github issue or find one you'd like to work on, then fork the repo to make the change.