Skip to content

Comments

Remove Elm.Syntax.Port#250

Open
jfmengels wants to merge 1 commit intobreaking-changes-v8from
remove-port-module
Open

Remove Elm.Syntax.Port#250
jfmengels wants to merge 1 commit intobreaking-changes-v8from
remove-port-module

Conversation

@jfmengels
Copy link
Collaborator

I feel like this module is a bit overkill. I don't know if we should have a type alias for Port inside Elm.Syntax.Declaration, or just inline the record (like what I did here).

A type alias makes it easier to add type annotations for these values should they need to be annotated, but it also adds indirection and makes it harder to know what data is available and under which name.

(If merged, I might squash this with the commit that introduced the module, as this was done in the breaking-changes-v8 branch)

@jfmengels jfmengels force-pushed the breaking-changes-v8 branch from eff82e1 to 0f43132 Compare August 7, 2024 15:59
@jfmengels jfmengels force-pushed the remove-port-module branch from dcd8713 to dacac82 Compare August 7, 2024 16:06
@jfmengels jfmengels force-pushed the breaking-changes-v8 branch 2 times, most recently from 7ccc635 to 1787a7f Compare September 12, 2024 14:52
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant