compiles with rescript@next (11-rc4) #153
Conversation
| @@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ module MutationQueryReducersMap = { | |||
| ~safeParse, | |||
| ) => | |||
| Js.Dict.map( | |||
| (. mutationQueryReducer) => mutationQueryReducer->MutationQueryReducer.toJs(~safeParse), | |||
| (. mutationQueryReducer) => mutationQueryReducer->MutationQueryReducer.toJs(~safeParse, ...), | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is the only place where new syntax is used that will force the minimum rescript version to 11? I'm not necessarily against it, but wonder if we should consider something like the below instead so we don't have to release a major version.
(. mutationQueryReducer) => (. json, options) => mutationQueryReducer->MutationQueryReducer.toJs(~safeParse, json, options),
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah let me see If i can remove it. I was doing this as a demonstration for my team so was trying everything out.
| @@ -313,12 +313,13 @@ module Js_ = { | |||
| ) => Js.Promise.t<FetchResult.Js_.t<'jsData>> = "mutate" | |||
|
|
|||
| // onClearStore(cb: () => Promise<any>): () => void; | |||
| // TODO: named arguments to binding? - AxM | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Was just curious myself, doesnt need your time. ill remove it.
|
Thanks much for this! I made a couple comments. I think we'll have to remember to update package.json to allow rescript 11 as well. I've sort of been waiting for the official migration documentation to come out before tackling this, but wondered if it would be possible for library authors to simply specify |
|
Hi Joel
Looking at my branch its coming from a very old place in the repo.
(I had a fork already and it didnt update before i got into it)
Let me try again today, and lets look at it again.
Thanks
A
…On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 6:53 AM Joel Jeddeloh ***@***.***> wrote:
Thanks much for this! I made a couple comments. I think we'll have to
remember to update package.json to allow rescript 11 as well.
I've sort of been waiting for the official migration documentation to come
out before tackling this, but wondered if it would be possible for library
authors to simply specify uncurried: false in bsconfig. At any rate, the
set of required changes seem pretty minimal so maybe this is better
regardless.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#153 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/APRNFBVKFKAEGMISXB54DLLX67Y4NANCNFSM6AAAAAA54XICNY>
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
AlexMoutonNoble
force-pushed
the
rescript-11
branch
2 times, most recently
from
cca3797
to
fcc7192
Compare
AlexMoutonNoble
force-pushed
the
rescript-11
branch
from
fcc7192
to
c70d5bb
Compare
No description provided.