Skip to content
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

feat: improve types #256

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 17, 2021
Merged

feat: improve types #256

merged 1 commit into from
Jan 17, 2021

Conversation

abramenal
Copy link
Owner

Checklist:

  • No linting issues
  • Commits are compliant with commitizen
  • CI tests have passed
  • Documentation updated

Summary of changes

Fix issue with type interface. Add exact type for encoding.

Linked issues

Closes #224

@abramenal abramenal merged commit 79a031e into main Jan 17, 2021
@abramenal abramenal deleted the feature/improve-types branch January 17, 2021 11:45
@paulblyth
Copy link
Contributor

@abramenal would you consider a re-write in TS to save manually keeping types in sync? I can help out

@abramenal
Copy link
Owner Author

@paulblyth I was thinking about that multiple times by now haha 😃
It will indeed be beneficial as least by making the further support easier with types (and possibly easier contribution process), but couldn't convince myself fully in spending effort to that instead of some bugs or docs update.
Apart from that, I am not aware how good and easy Cypress internal types are. I remember some struggle with their async stuff while using it in JS, so it could be even more when doing types there.

But in any case I see this as an inevitable step in the future. So if you are interested, I am happy to support 💪
#263

Apart from that, if you have any ideas on improving current approach/design/API/whatever – I'm totally open for that too

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.

[Bug] Example not correct
2 participants