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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Unified
withParams
utility to replace individualpath
,query
, andhost
utilities #447Unified
withParams
utility to replace individualpath
,query
, andhost
utilities #447Changes from 7 commits
310fe0f
dd6e409
f4b374d
234848e
7eeeaf8
698c9ae
9706e12
99d5b7b
4d9547b
d6b002d
caecf3e
8985622
b25e1c8
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
I feel like the combinePath naming doesn't make sense now that its used for all the different pieces. Its also kinda interesting that since it accepts
WithParams
that there's no type safety preventing us from accidentally doingWithParams<TParent['path'], TQuery>
🤔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.
I don't think we have that protection today, but it might be worth exploring. Something like assigning an internal
kind
(tagged type) to ensure wires don't get crossedThere 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.
Do we gain something from the
undefined
vs{}
change?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.
if we just assume hash
''
(empty string) is the same asundefined
we could remove all thetoStrings()
. See if you can remember why hash was special and expectedundefined
separately from empty string