I would certainly rather see this than {isAdmin: bool; isLoggedIn: bool}. With boolean | null, at least illegal states are unrepresentable… even if the legal states are represented in an… interesting way.
not logged in (null or {isAdmin:false, isLoggedIn:false})
logged in as non-admin (false or {isAdmin:false, isLoggedIn:true})
logged in as admin (true or {isAdmin:true, isLoggedIn:true})
which leaves {isAdmin:true, isLoggedIn:false} as an invalid, nonsensical state. (How would you know the user’s an admin if they’re not logged in?) Of course, in a different context, all four states could potentially be distinctly meaningful.
I would certainly rather see this than
{isAdmin: bool; isLoggedIn: bool}. Withboolean | null, at least illegal states are unrepresentable… even if the legal states are represented in an… interesting way.Admin false LoggedIn false doesn’t feel illegal to me, more redundant if anything
I was thinking of the three legal states as:
nullor{isAdmin: false, isLoggedIn: false})falseor{isAdmin: false, isLoggedIn: true})trueor{isAdmin: true, isLoggedIn: true})which leaves
{isAdmin: true, isLoggedIn: false}as an invalid, nonsensical state. (How would you know the user’s an admin if they’re not logged in?) Of course, in a different context, all four states could potentially be distinctly meaningful.ah you are right! i am so dumb.
Honestly logged in is state and shouldn’t be on the user object.