🚀 Feature: use an established validation library like `zod` or `valibot` for validation

[andreww2012]

Feature Request Checklist

• I have searched for related issues and found none that matched my issue.

Overview

This is actually the idea that came to my mind when I started getting acquainted with the codebase 😊 I was noticing a lot of "low level" checks such of typeof checks, empty strings checks, etc.

I'd like to propose making the validators more declarative by utilizing some popular validation library like zod or valibot. I’m fairly confident this could be done without changing the public API.

Additional Info

No response

[michaelfaith]

It's not something i'd be opposed to, but i think there'd have to be a very clear value proposition for adopting zod. I wouldn't be in favor of changing the public api for it or requiring that consumers need to use it in some way, but i'm open to using it internally if there's a compelling reason and clear benefits. The sort of type checking that we're doing right now is so light touch that i'm not sure i see the cost / benefit working in its favor, but i'm open to being convinced otherwise.

Could you go into a bit more detail about what specifically you had in mind, and outline what you see the value proposition being?