-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25.7k
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
refactor(core): remove DeepReadonly type wrapper for signals #49644
refactor(core): remove DeepReadonly type wrapper for signals #49644
Conversation
6cc6da5
to
1a6ce1e
Compare
We've been experimenting with the DeepReadonly type that would make signal values deeply read-only and prevent accidental changes without going to the owner of data. What we've found out during the experiments is that additional safety net has more drawbacks than benefits: it just introduces too much friction to be practical for daily usage.
1a6ce1e
to
8332757
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Reviewed-for: public-api
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Reviewed-for: global-approvers
Closing this PR as the commit from it got folded into #49154 |
This issue has been automatically locked due to inactivity. Read more about our automatic conversation locking policy. This action has been performed automatically by a bot. |
We've been experimenting with the DeepReadonly type that would make signal values deeply read-only and prevent accidental changes without going to the owner of data. What we've found out during the experiments is that additional safety net has more drawbacks than benefits: it just introduces too much friction to be practical for daily usage.