Support for custom builder methods #415
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Given we have a stable and flexible API for building types I think it's relatively safe to give users a way to define custom type constructors. An even "safer" way would be using refinements but it doesn't look it's worth it.
solnic
approved these changes
Jan 18, 2021
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I love this! Amazing job @flash-gordon (here and other related PRs) 👏🏻 🚀 🎉
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Given we have a stable and flexible API for building types I think it's relatively safe to give users a way to define custom type constructors. An even "safer" way would be using refinements but it doesn't look it's worth it.
ref #413, #409