Suggestion: An alias method to output readonly array for Seq #1
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
|
@hachibeeDI I think you are correct. |
|
@hachibeeDI needs to be modified as well. |
|
Sure things! I'll make some changes to my branch. one sec please... |
hachibeeDI
force-pushed
the
to-readonly-array
branch
3 times, most recently
from
c04c127
to
10fb5e5
Compare
hachibeeDI
force-pushed
the
to-readonly-array
branch
from
10fb5e5
to
7a1a0d8
Compare
|
Okay, now they all are marked as readonly. |
|
@hachibeeDI Merged and released as v1.4.4! |
|
I made a mistake and released a patch version. |
|
Thanks! |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Hello,
This is a suggestion to support
ReadonlyArray<T>.In my opinion, ReadonlyArray is always a preferable choice than mutable one. (So they should be
toMutableArray()andtoArray()though, I hesitate to break backward compatibility)Also, I think some operators are able to support that interface i.e. the result of groupBy.
I would commit for some enhancement if you feel positive against that.
Thanks!