New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Better typings #8612
Comments
Would you mind sharing your custom types, @John0x? |
I support this feature request, for example, i'm trying to guess what to pass to this Amplify.configure(). According to reference this is what i got: |
I think it would be good to collect together some of the typings that the community has created to see where the gaps are. |
We have published an RFC on our plan for improving TypeScript support in Amplify JS & would love to get your feedback & suggestions! |
The developer preview for v6 of Amplify has officially been released with improved support for TypeScript and much more! Please check out our announcement and updated documentation to see what has changed. This issue should be resolved within the dev preview and upcoming General Availability for Amplify v6, but let us know with a comment if there are further issues. |
With the release of the latest major version of Amplify (aws-amplify@>6), this issue should now be resolved! Please refer to our release announcement, migration guide, and documentation for more information. |
Is this related to a new or existing framework?
No response
Is this related to a new or existing API?
No response
Is this related to another service?
No response
Describe the feature you'd like to request
The typings for the aws-amplify js library are lacking in a lot of places, and the lack of support from the aws team is concerning.
See: #4927
There was one response from an official contributor (@sammartinez), which was obviously not helping, to be honest. A lot of projects, nowadays, use typescript and therefore require accurate typings. The issue is older than a year and the problem hasn't even been addressed properly yet, at least from what I've read.
The issue should not have been closed.
Describe the solution you'd like
Add proper types that accurately match the actual object.
Describe alternatives you've considered
Writing my own types, which I have. That should not be considered a solution tho
Additional context
No response
Is this something that you'd be interested in working on?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: