Rescript 12 - #848
Rescript 12#848
Conversation
|
I tested on my project without issue, and it's on production. Do you see something else you want to change or improve? |
… for improved consistency
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| function timing(prim0, prim1) { | ||
| return ReactNative.Animated.timing(prim0, prim1); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this seems wrong
but not sure if it was a compiler bug
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why it's wrong? It look the same in the .bs.js
function timing(prim0, prim1) {
return ReactNative.Animated.timing(prim0, prim1);
}There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is not zero cost, but it could be, if you duplicate the binding definition instead of using let.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, I see! But it's not really a regression, we've been living with it for years now, so for me it's a non-blocker for this PR.
It's definitely something we could improve as part of a more global Animated refactoring, though!
For now, IMO, the goal should be to move forward with a 0.84 release using Rescript 12.0. We're already a bit late on the release, so we can use a later one for other Rescript updates (12.1, 12.2, 12.3?) or a breaking-change refactor.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you create an issue for it?
|
This PR has Edit: I tried locally |
|
@codex review |
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 941e20c646
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
Hi @fhammerschmidt @cknitt , just following up on this PR. Is everything okay on your side, and do you think we can move forward with merging it? Thanks! |
Upgrade bindings to ReScript 12 (peer
>=12.0, ESM,.res.js) and clean up APIs along the way.Tooling / platform
@rescript/react0.15esmodule, suffix.res.js, new CLI scriptsJs.*→nullable/null/Int/Float/RegExp)Breaking API cleanups
share,loop,sendIntent, …)@unboxedforVibration,Linking.ExtraValue,Image.SourceImage.Source:Require/URISource/URISources(replacesfrom*); dropgetSize_legacyPackager.requiredisfloat(Metro asset id)Type organization (additive / internal)
Accessibility.props/iosProps/androidProps/viewPropsLayoutmodule (point,size,rectangle,insets) reused inevents/ScrollView/ImageImagecomposesView.viewPropsWithoutChildren+ ios/android image propsPointerEvent+View.pointerEventProps(also Text / Pressable / Image via View)Not in this PR
@obj→ unboxed transforms (bigger follow-up)Animated.event1/event2left as-is (reverted unification)