-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
Node data stricter types #1262
Node data stricter types #1262
Conversation
🦋 Changeset is good to goLatest commit: 36ed8d0 We got this. This PR includes changesets to release 7 packages
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
This pull request is automatically built and testable in CodeSandbox. To see build info of the built libraries, click here or the icon next to each commit SHA. Latest deployment of this branch, based on commit 36ed8d0:
|
Re: changeset, this probably fits into the "minor change" category since a "public" method is being changed from |
Yeah, I was planning to make it a minor. I assume you are OK with changes here so I'm going to add changesets later and ping you for a final review. |
Yep, all good! |
…er/PropertyMapper rework
@davidkpiano ok, i've added changesets - please take a look. |
Addresses #1261
I still need to write changeset for this but I would like to get feedback first.
| any
that I could find because it's like multiplying by 0 - you always get0any, all other union members are just lostStateNode#data
toStateNode#doneData
because TS couldn't infer things correctly due to overlapping.data
properties in bothInvokeConfig
andStateNode
which are both allowed forinvoke
property. A simplified version of the problem can be checked out here after uncommenting that single comment in theConfig
type