馃敤 overload in TS & avoid assertion #289
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
It appears to be repeating itself, but in reality, one is taking CookieOptions<T> & {readonly: true;} as input and returning Readonly<CookieRef<T>>, while the other is taking CookieOptions<T> & {readonly: true;} as input and returning CookieRef<T>. This way, it aligns with the appropriate overload call pattern.
prazdevs
approved these changes
Apr 3, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Description
No overload match...Now it appears to be repeating itself, but in reality, one is taking CookieOptions & {readonly: true;} as input and returning Readonly<CookieRef>, while the other is taking CookieOptions & {readonly: false | undefined;} as input and returning CookieRef. This way, it aligns with the appropriate overload call pattern.