Skip to content

Type ObjectProxy more precisely; drop unsafe cast #661

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

Open
wants to merge 3,827 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

bennostein
Copy link
Contributor

Noticed this the other day while investigating #648 ; giving a better type to ObjectProxys lets us avoid the spooky expr as unknown as type cast

jberdine and others added 30 commits November 27, 2024 15:44
As it says on the tin.

I noticed this while writing up resource/service docs, and couldn't
think of any case where it makes sense to have a service with no output
resources. Nor does any such case exist in our examples.
... and provide a cleanup callback in the hackernews example's useEffect code
Not a lot to say here, really -- using SSEs means that there's not a ton
of Skip-specific work to do on the client.

So, I dive quickly into the actual event-stream data sent over the wire,
give some examples of how to work with it in client code, and also show
how synchronous reads work.
High-level description of the resource/service abstraction layer, and
route-by-route documentation of the control and streaming HTTP APIs.
jberdine and others added 28 commits January 15, 2025 16:26
keys: IterableIterator<keyof Base>;
} & Base;
export type ObjectProxy<Base extends { [k: string]: Exportable }> =
ObjectHandle<Internal.CJObject> &
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not sure about this, e.g. I don't think you can access .pointer directly

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants