Repository navigation
Design Meeting Notes, 5/10/2019 #31350
Description
Activity
- addedDesign NotesNotes from our design meetingsNotes from our design meetings
on May 10, 2019 Daniel Rosenwasser (@DanielRosenwasser) Why you don't address #31148?
MartinJohns commented
on May 11, 2019 ContributorMore actionsfalsandtru (@falsandtru) Because time is limited, and they did not get to discuss your favorite issue.
Martin Johns (@MartinJohns) Looks like you don't have any ability or position to evaluate the problem.
Reacted by poseidonCore and Will ChenReacted by Martin Johns and S. B. TamMartinJohns commented
on May 11, 2019 ContributorMore actionsThat's a rude and silly thing to say, but even if it would be true it would be irrelevant. You asked why they did not address your issue in the design meeting notes, and I gave you an answer. I don't need to have any special abilities or a position in the TypeScript team to give you this answer. It's just common sense.
The TypeScript team consists of humans, and they have limited time. They prioritize the issues and then discuss the issues on top of their list. Your issue was not on top of the list and there was not enough time to discuss all issues.
Reacted by Titian Cernicova-Dragomir, poseidonCore, Will Chen and Dick van den BrinkFYI, blocking a voice of the person concerned is no common sense. It is a behavior of dictators. Thanks.
Reacted by Martin Johns, poseidonCore and Will ChenReacted by Dick van den Brinkmight be related #30696 (comment)
DanielRosenwasser commented
on May 13, 2019 MemberAuthorMore actionsDaniel Rosenwasser (@DanielRosenwasser) Why you don't address #31148?
The most critical thing we are dealing with right now is performance issues that were introduced in TypeScript 3.4. Array spread behavior is one of our most upvoted issues and it has a clear solution.
I've no objection to the current items but #31148 is an important and deep-rooted problem which breaks TypeScript ecosystem on npm. So I think you should keep your team informed about it to find a solution.
RyanCavanaugh commented
on May 14, 2019 MemberMore actionsfalsandtru (@falsandtru) thanks for your feedback on prioritization. We can't change what we discussed in a meeting that occurred in the past, but will keep evaluating feedback in this area. You might also want to track #18588 since it relates to your concerns.
Reacted by falsandtruThanks for your correct info. I move to there. However, I think that solution will be a workaround but probably it is not the best.
Perf edition!
Fix relations of instantiations of the same signature
#31029
anys.Observertype (which is actually invarian) and theaddObservermethod whose methods take a key and a value for the current type.styled-componentsincreases in type-checking time.Now we're talking about
Slow completions
thistype to decide whether we should even show methods in the first place.infertypes.Action items:
thisparameter filtering in completions. (Wesley Wigham (@weswigham))Caching control flow results across invocations
#31003
Array spread emit fixes
#8856
#31166
concatand that omits missing elements.--downlevelIteration, this works right, but not otherwise.