- Sponsor
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24
New issue
Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? # to your account
Bring mutating optimisations back #13
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Some typos
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Couple more typos restructuring the state tuple
Co-authored-by: Kyle Daruwalla <daruwalla.k.public@icloud.com>
@DhairyaLGandhi I have rebased this locally, do you mind if I push it? |
I think I wanted to handle this separately. It also seems like some other changes were merged hastily? |
What do you mean handled separately? This has been in need of a rebase for months (any recent changes weren't the reason for preventing this from being merged). |
Mutation isn't the goal - so Handling the code duplication separately. Mutation should not be the default unless it is absolutely needed. The api change also needs to be accounted for. |
I am confused. Do you still want to merge this PR or not? All I want is to merge this PR. |
We can merge it when we need it. We'd prolly not make mutation the default though. |
Superseded by #31. |
No description provided.