Conflicts and Implications

This example illustrates how .conflicts() and .implies() can be used to enforce mutually exclusive options and mutually required options, respectively.

Code

Conflicts and Implications

import cli from 'cli-forge';

cli('conflicts-and-implications', {
  builder: (args) =>
    args
      .option('source', {
        describe: 'Source database',
        type: 'string',
      })
      .option('target', {
        describe: 'Target database',
        type: 'string',
      })
      .option('dry-run', {
        describe: 'Simulate the migration without making changes',
        type: 'boolean',
      })
      .option('force', {
        describe: 'Force the migration even if there are warnings',
        type: 'boolean',
      })
      .option('backup', {
        describe: 'Where should the backup be stored',
        type: 'string',
      })
      // Conflicts creates mutually exclusive arguments. Validation will throw an error if both options are provided.
      // In this case, it makes sense that the user wouldn't want to both simulate and force a migration.
      .conflicts('dry-run', 'force')

      // Implies creates mutually required arguments. Validation will throw an error if the first argument is provided without the second.
      // Practically in this case, this means that if the user provides the --force option, they must also provide the --backup option.
      .implies('force', 'backup'),
  handler: (args) => {
    // ...
  },
}).forge();

View on TypeScript Playground

Usage

node ./conflicts-and-implications.js --source=old --target=new

node ./conflicts-and-implications.js --source=old --target=new --dry-run

These examples are ran as e2e tests on pull-requests and releases to verify they are accurate and up to date. If you see any issues, please open an issue on the github repo.