You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
FieldNote is not a 'real' note type in that it's an incomplete implementation of a barebones note not meant to be used in any real application, and it only exists for testing purposes. However its name leads to confusing as it makes users go 'oh this is a note that contains a field, neat', when they should really be using ValueNote. I'd advise against renaming ValueNote at this stage to minimize churn.
We should be able to mostly get rid of FieldNote, and create a TestNote type in places where we can't (e.g. TestContract) as part of that package, instead of it being its own seemingly legit package like ValueNote or AddressNote.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
FieldNote
is not a 'real' note type in that it's an incomplete implementation of a barebones note not meant to be used in any real application, and it only exists for testing purposes. However its name leads to confusing as it makes users go 'oh this is a note that contains a field, neat', when they should really be usingValueNote
. I'd advise against renamingValueNote
at this stage to minimize churn.We should be able to mostly get rid of
FieldNote
, and create aTestNote
type in places where we can't (e.g.TestContract
) as part of that package, instead of it being its own seemingly legit package likeValueNote
orAddressNote
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: