Skip to content
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

persistence_UNSTABLE not mentioned in Recoil documentation #14

Closed
rhys-saldanha opened this issue Jan 23, 2021 · 5 comments
Closed

persistence_UNSTABLE not mentioned in Recoil documentation #14

rhys-saldanha opened this issue Jan 23, 2021 · 5 comments

Comments

@rhys-saldanha
Copy link
Contributor

I think this is a symptom of the property being unstable, but in the current latest version of Recoil, adding it to my atom definition is throwing a TypeScript error.

I've checked the Recoil documentation and persistence_UNSTABLE isn't mentioned anywhere. For reference, annotating the property with ts-ignore fixes the issue and local persistence works as expected.

Is this a missing type within Recoil, or is this property only needed and used by recoil-persist?

@polemius
Copy link
Owner

Here the PR with this documentation.

This options will changed to effects_UNSTABLE and I have to update recoil-persist library.

@rhys-saldanha
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've seen the same (different PR, same information), if I figure out what I'm doing am I ok to submit a PR referencing this issue?

@polemius
Copy link
Owner

@rhys-saldanha yes, of course 👍

@rhys-saldanha
Copy link
Contributor Author

I have a working implementation for atom (the simple case) using effects_UNSTABLE, but it fails for use with atomFamily - once #3 is solved, I think I'll have enough info to fix my implementation

rhys-saldanha referenced this issue in rhys-saldanha/recoil-persist Jan 31, 2021
polemius added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 2, 2021
@polemius
Copy link
Owner

polemius commented Feb 2, 2021

@rhys-saldanha Thank you very much for your contribution. I have updated examples in README and also added the migration guide to 2.0.0. Looks like we could close this issue.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants