Skip to content

WIP Solution for #94 #95

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

parisholley
Copy link
Contributor

@parisholley parisholley commented Aug 13, 2020

I'm hitting my head on a wall on a way to implement a condition method to resolve #94 .. I feel like I'm running into some variation of microsoft/TypeScript#30853

I thought maybe we could be creative with a "is" check function:

function isArray<U>(state: any): state is ReadonlyArray<U> {
    return state.keys && typeof state.keys[0] === 'number';
}

or casting, but can't find a good way to get the check to go away

@parisholley parisholley changed the title WIP Solution for #4 WIP Solution for #94 Aug 13, 2020
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #95 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master      #95   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   90.83%   90.83%           
=======================================
  Files           1        1           
  Lines         480      480           
  Branches      132      132           
=======================================
  Hits          436      436           
  Misses         44       44           

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update c1585a1...136de3d. Read the comment docs.

@parisholley parisholley closed this Sep 6, 2020
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.

Proposal to improve Validation plugin
2 participants