Using fp-ts for HTTP requests and validation
Kimmo Sääskilahti
Posted on August 29, 2019
fp-ts is a great TypeScript library for functional programming. I haven't found that many real world usage examples out there, so I thought it might be fun to take a repository and try adding fp-ts
there. More specifically, I wanted to learn more about making HTTP requests with fp-ts
.
Through my work on unmock-js, I've seen quite a few libraries using third-party APIs. I therefore decided to use fp-ts
in one of those, namely danger-js. Their GitLabAPI class is a reasonably simple wrapper around a GitLab SDK and it's also easy to detach from the rest of the codebase.
The full code can be found in this repository, which is a stripped down version of the danger-js
code.
Before starting functionalizing, a few disclaimers 🤓 There's nothing wrong with the existing GitLabAPI
class, it's all for practice! This post is also not meant to be about the general pros and cons of using functional programming versus some other programming style. I'm also not an expert in FP, so my way of rewriting the API requests in the library is not the "correct" way. Let me know in the comments if you think this made or did not make any sense, or take my repo and write one of the methods in your own way! I'm happy to see alternative and better implementations in comments.
Getting started
Let's get to it! For fetching the user profile for the user owning the GitLab API token, GitLabAPI
has the following function:
class GitLabAPI {
...
getUser = async (): Promise<GitLabUserProfile> => {
debugLog("getUser");
const user: GitLabUserProfile = (await this.api.Users.current()) as GitLabUserProfile;
debugLog("getUser", user);
return user;
};
}
I've changed a few things here compared to the original GitLabAPI. First, I added typing to this.api
with the following additions:
import { GitLab } from "gitlab";
...
type GitLab = InstanceType<GitLab>;
class GitLabAPI {
this.api: GitLab;
...
}
The GitLab
constructor is imported from here. In the original code, this.api
was typed as any
, so all type-checks were disabled.
Because of the added type-checking, this.api.users.current()
returns a GetResponse type instead of any
. Therefore, one needs an explicit type-cast ("as GitLabUserProfile
") to make the return type correct.
Alright, here's my version of getUser
in a more FP style:
// GitLabAPI.ts
import { Lazy } from "fp-ts/lib/function";
import { Either, left, right } from "fp-ts/lib/Either";
import { pipe } from "fp-ts/lib/pipeable";
import { TaskEither } from "fp-ts/lib/TaskEither";
import TE from "./TaskEitherUtils";
...
const logValue = TE.logValueWith(debugLog);
...
getUserFp = (): TaskEither<Error, GitLabUserProfile> => {
// I/O action for fetching user from API
const getUserThunk: Lazy<Promise<GetResponse>> = () => {
debugLog("getUser");
return this.api.Users.current();
};
// Validate user profile
const validateUserProfile = (
response: object
): Either<Error, GitLabUserProfile> => {
// TODO Better validation
return hasKey(response, "id")
? right(response as GitLabUserProfile)
: left(Error("Invalid user profile"));
};
// Pipe computations
return pipe(
getUserThunk,
TE.fromThunk,
logValue("getUser"),
TE.chainEither(validateUserProfile)
);
};
Wow, that got longer! And the snippet did not even include the helpers in TaskEitherUtils.ts
. Let's go through this step by step.
TaskEither 101
Let us start from the return type of our new function, TaskEither<Error, GitLabUserProfile>
. In fp-ts, TaskEither
is described as follows:
TaskEither<E, A>
represents an asynchronous computation that either yields a value of typeA
or fails yielding an error of typeE
.
That sounds a lot like an API call! A call to an external API is asynchronous and it definitely can fail. Also note that TaskEither
represents a computation, not the result of the computation. We can call getUserFp
ten times without worrying about hitting the GitLab API every time.
We've made getUserFp
a pure function: it does not have observable side effects such as logging to console, sending a HTTP request to GitLabAPI, throwing an error, or feeding a neighbor's dog. Pure functions also always return the same result for the same input: that makes them really nice to test and compose!
Let's dig deeper into TaskEither
. It's defined as follows in fp-ts
:
// fp-ts/lib/TaskEither.ts
export interface TaskEither<E, A> extends Task<Either<E, A>> {}
Ok, so it's an alias for Task<Either<E, A>>
. Task
is defined as follows:
// fp-ts/lib/Task.ts
export interface Task<A> {
(): Promise<A>;
}
With this definition, we can conclude that TaskEither<E, A>
is an alias for () => Promise<Either<E, A>>
: a thunk that when called launches an asynchronous computation. The result of the computation is wrapped in a Promise
.
The return value of the Promise
is Either, described as follows in fp-ts
:
An instance of
Either
is either an instance ofLeft
orRight
.
... Convention dictates thatLeft
is used for failure andRight
is used for success.
So an Either
can contain either a value representing error ("left") or a value representing success ("right").
Creating a TaskEither
How do we create a TaskEither
for the API call? In getUserFp
, the following is a computation launching the API request:
// GitLabAPI.ts
// I/O action for fetching user from API
const getUserThunk: Lazy<Promise<GetResponse>> = () => this.api.Users.current();
When called and awaited, it can throw. Instead, we want to wrap the computation in TaskEither
so that it never throws, but failure is instead wrapped in the Either
type resolved in the Promise
. A computation like getUserThunk
can be lifted to a TaskEither
with the tryCatch
function:
// fp-ts/lib/TaskEither.ts
export function tryCatch<E, A>(
f: Lazy<Promise<A>>,
onRejected: (reason: unknown) => E
): TaskEither<E, A> {
return () => f().then(a => E.right(a), reason => E.left(onRejected(reason)));
}
Here Lazy is simply a synonym for a thunk returning an A
:
// fp-ts/lib/function.ts
export interface Lazy<A> {
(): A;
}
tryCatch
takes a thunk that returns a promise that may fail (like our getUserThunk
) and returns a TaskEither
containing a promise that never fails. If the original promise failed, the promise resolved from TaskEither
will contain a "left", otherwise it's "right".
For lifting any thunk of type () => Promise<A>
to a TaskEither<Error, A>
, I've defined the following helper function in TaskEitherUtils.ts
:
// TaskEitherUtils.ts
import { toError } from "fp-ts/lib/Either.ts";
function fromThunk<A>(thunk: Lazy<Promise<A>>): TaskEither<Error, A> {
return tryCatch(thunk, toError);
}
You can see this being used as the first function in the pipe
at the end of getUserFp
.
Validating the response
Let us now take a look at validation. User profile is validated with the following function:
// GitLabAPI.ts
// Validate user profile
const validateUserProfile = (
response: object
): Either<Error, GitLabUserProfile> => {
// TODO Better validation
return hasKey(response, "id")
? right(response as GitLabUserProfile)
: left(Error("Invalid user profile"));
};
Here hasKey
is defined as
// GitLabAPI.ts
function hasKey<K extends string>(o: {}, k: K): o is { [_ in K]: any } {
return typeof o === "object" && k in o;
}
I'm being very lazy here and just checking if the response body has an id
field (which a valid GitLabUserProfile
should have). If it does have it, the response is cast to a GitLabUserProfile
object and returned wrapped in a right
, signifying successful validation. If the validation fails, we return an instance of left
with Error
.
In the real world, we'd probably want to validate the response using, for example, io-ts, a great run-time type-checking library written by the author of fp-ts
. To keep this post a bit shorter, I won't get into that here. The important point is that the validation step returns an Either
that we want to include in our function's return value.
Putting it all together
Finally, everything's put together in the pipe at the end of the function:
// GitLabAPI.ts
return pipe(
getUserThunk, // Lazy<Promise<GetResponse>>
TE.fromThunk, // -> TaskEither<Error, GetResponse>
logValue("getUser"), // -> TaskEither<Error, GetResponse>
TE.chainEither(validateUserProfile) // -> TaskEither<Error, GitLabUserProfile>
);
Here's what the typing for pipe
looks like:
// fp-ts/lib/pipeable.ts
export function pipe<A>(a: A): A;
export function pipe<A, B>(a: A, ab: (a: A) => B): B;
export function pipe<A, B, C>(a: A, ab: (a: A) => B, bc: (b: B) => C): C;
// ...and so on
We can see that pipe
takes a value of type A
as the first argument and pipes it through the functions that follow. The type returned from the pipe
is the return type of the last function argument.
The first function in our pipe
is the TE.fromThunk
that we saw above, converting the lazy promise to an TaskEither
. The following is logValue("getUser")
, where logValue
is defined as follows:
// GitLabAPI.ts
const debugLog = debug("GitLabAPI");
const logValue = TE.logValueWith(debugLog);
Here debugLog
is a function used for logging and TE.logValueWith
is defined in TaskEitherUtils.ts
as follows:
// TaskEitherUtils.ts
import { map } from "fp-ts/lib/TaskEither";
function logValueWith(logger: (firstArg: any, ...args: any[]) => void) {
return <A>(logString: String) =>
map((obj: A) => {
logger(logString, obj);
return obj;
});
}
This function takes a logger and returns a function. The returned function takes a log string (like "getUser") and returns a map
that can be applied to a TaskEither
instance. map
applies a function to the value inside TaskEither
(if it's an instance of right
). In our case, the value is the response returned by the API. After logging the value with logger(logString, obj)
, the value is returned so that it's available for the next function of the pipe
.
You might be asking if going through all this to log a single line is worth the trouble, and that's a good question. We'll talk about that at the end of this post.
Ok, final piece of the puzzle is the TE.chainEither(validateUserProfile)
, which is the last function in our pipe
. TE.chainEither
is defined as follows:
// TaskEitherUtils.ts
import { flow } from "fp-ts/lib/function";
import { chain, TaskEither, fromEither } from "fp-ts/lib/TaskEither";
import { Either } from "fp-ts/lib/Either";
function chainEither<A, B>(
f: (a: A) => Either<Error, B>
): (ma: TaskEither<Error, A>) => TaskEither<Error, B> {
return chain(
flow(
f,
fromEither
)
);
}
Let's first look at the type. It takes a function of the type f: (a: A) => Either<Error, B>
. This is the type of our validation function, with A
and B
replaced by GetResponse
and GitLabUserProfile
, respectively. chainEither
returns a function of type (ma: TaskEither<Error, A>) => TaskEither<Error, B>
. Replacing B
with GitLabUserProfile
, we see that this function fits as last part of the pipe.
Ok, the types make sense, so let's look at the implementation. The chain
is a function that's used for mapping the value wrapped inside TaskEither
with a function that returns a TaskEither
. This can be a bit confusing, so I'll try to clarify the types:
const getResponseTe: TaskEither<Error, GetResponse> = ... // This is our TaskEither
const validateUserProfile = (getResponseTe: GetResponse) => TaskEither<Error, GitLabUserProfile> = ... // This is the validation function we want apply to `a: GetResponse`
chain(validateUserProfile) // Function with signature: `TaskEither<Error, GetResponse>` => `TaskEither<Error, GitLabUserProfile>`
chain(validateUserProfile)(getResponseTe) // TaskEither<Error, GitLabUserProfile>
This would be perfect for us, if the validation function returned a TaskEither
. But I cheated: it returns an Either
. So it was all for nothing!
JK, it wasn't! TaskEither.ts
has a function called fromEither
for creating an Either
from a TaskEither
. So if we apply that to the result of validation, we'll have composed a function of type GetResponse => TaskEither<Error, GitLabUserProfile>
. And then we use chain
to get a function of type TaskEither<Error, GetResponse>
to TaskEither<Error, GitLabUserProfile>
.
In fp-ts
, functions can be composed with flow
from fp-ts/lib/function.ts
. Here is its type definition:
// fp-ts/lib/function.ts
export function flow<A extends Array<unknown>, B>(
ab: (...a: A) => B
): (...a: A) => B;
export function flow<A extends Array<unknown>, B, C>(
ab: (...a: A) => B,
bc: (b: B) => C
): (...a: A) => C;
// ...and so on
In our chainEither
, flow(f, fromEither)
is a function composition from left to right: it's a function that first applies f
(the validation) and then applies fromEither
(to make the type compatible with chain
).
That concludes our rewrite of getUser
!
Why's it so long?
Clearly the method getUser
got a lot longer in my rewrite. However, there are a few points one can make here in the FP style's defence.
First, we wrote a lot of helper functions. Without the helpers, we would have been able to cut the number of lines to following:
// GitLabAPI.ts
// getUserFpShort
return pipe(
() => {
debugLog("getUser");
return this.api.Users.current();
},
thunk => tryCatch(thunk, toError),
map((obj: GetResponse) => {
debugLog("getUser", obj);
return obj;
}),
chain(
flow(
validateUserProfile,
fromEither
)
)
That's not so much longer than the original function. However, we have lost reusability: re-writing the rest of the functions in FP style requires duplicating code. With the helper functions, it becomes rather trivial.
Second, the function is now pure and the return type is an abstract data type with a rich set of combinators. One can therefore easily compose longer pipelines from smaller functions using all the combinators available for TaskEither
.
Third, we added an explicit validation step that was done only implicitly (as GitLabUserProfile
) in the original function, so that also added a few lines.
Was it worth it?
Finally, one can ponder whether it's worth the effort to refactor the methods in GitLabAPI
to be pure functions returning TaskEither
s. I think that depends on how the GitLabAPI
class is used. If the user of the class immediately throws away TaskEither
by awaiting the promise and checking for error, we have only added unnecessary complexity and replaced a try-catch
block with isLeft
check.
On the other hand, if the user of the class takes the TaskEither
and composes it with other tasks to create bigger stories, I think the more FP-like solution might be in place. One could also take a bit softer stand on purity and allow functions to log to console at will.
This was my first post in dev.to! I hope someone finds it useful: I learned a lot of fp-ts
writing it and also got lot of satisfaction for the successful type-checks. Thank you for reading and sharing your comments!
Resources
-
Getting started with fp-ts series: A great way to learn
fp-ts
-
Interoperability with non-functional code using fp-ts: useful article mentioning
TaskEither
- Learn you a Haskell book: the funkiest way to learn Haskell, a pure functional programming language
- Functional programming sparks joy: A recent article on functional programming that I enjoyed
Posted on August 29, 2019
Join Our Newsletter. No Spam, Only the good stuff.
Sign up to receive the latest update from our blog.
Related
November 29, 2024