Replies: 1 comment 1 reply
-
| 
         Looks to be similar to #353. While it's likely simple to implement, it grows the API surface area and creates multiple ways of setting a new signal value, which isn't really ideal. That being said, we do expose the Signal class so you can patch your   | 
  
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
                  
                    1 reply
                  
                
            
  
    Sign up for free
    to join this conversation on GitHub.
    Already have an account?
    Sign in to comment
  
        
    
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Hi everyone.
I know this is an issue with Proxies and not signals specifically, but having to do:
is not favourable.
I understand the why, however, I don't see why something like
Signal.update()couldn't be implemented.If this is silly, I apologise, I haven't looked at the source for
signals-corejust yet, but I would assume this is pretty simple to do.Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions