Add missing All, Any, and friends validators

[joneshf]

Terraform CLI and Framework Versions

$ terraform version
Terraform v1.3.6
on darwin_amd64

Your version of Terraform is out of date! The latest version
is 1.4.2. You can update by downloading from https://www.terraform.io/downloads.html

$ go list -m github.com/hashicorp/terraform-plugin-framework
github.com/hashicorp/terraform-plugin-framework v1.1.1

Use Cases or Problem Statement

In #80, the metavalidator package was replaced with concrete implementations for most of the data types. Unfortunately, the boolvalidator, datasourcevalidator, providervalidator, and resourcevalidator packages didn't get All, Any, and friends like the rest of the *validator packages.

The lack of feature parity in the these package makes it very hard to express logic on boolean attributes in the same way you can on other data types. You either have to roll your own implementation (which is the hard part), or not validate. Both choices are unideal.

Proposal

In order of preference:

1. Add back the metavalidator package. However, I think this ship has sailed. So it's fine if this isn't the selected option.

   My opinion as a provider author is that having to use a different function in a different package for the sake of type safety is more a bug than a feature. It feels like between one of generics and interfaces, there's a solution that would let provider authors have the ease of use to create validations with the same function while also giving the framework the type safety it requires.

2. Add the All, Any, and friends versions to the boolvalidator, datasourcevalidator, providervalidator, and resourcevalidator packages.

   I would hope that any validation could be combined with All, Any, and friends.

3. Add the All, Any, and friends versions to the boolvalidator package.

   I could imagine there might be strong opinions about whether the datasourcevalidator, providervalidator, and resourcevalidator packages need All, Any and friends. I would rather drop my implementation of AnyWithAllWarnings for booleans by at least having the boolvalidator package implement this behavior, than get bogged down in that opinion. It makes sense to me that anything should be able to combine validators in these ways, but I also am not maintaining this framework so my opinion is only worth so much.

   If there's opinions about the other three, then just punt and at least have feature parity for the boolean stuff.

Additional Information

No response

Code of Conduct

• I agree to follow this project's Code of Conduct

[github-actions]

I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.
If you have found a problem that seems similar to this, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.