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
The OpenApiItems prisms section defines Reviews, not Prisms. I assume that's a mistake? A Prism is a Review but not the other way around, so this is needlessly limiting.
In the history of the file, I see that Prisms used to be generated using makePrisms, but in cd3dc81 the makePrisms was replaced with a manual prism definition... with a Review type signature. The commit message says "fix build by manually writing out SwaggerItems prisms", so it does not seem like the restriction to Review was intentional.
Later on, in 68e95a6, the prism implementation was changed to an unto, which does produce a Review, but the second direction of the prism implementation was kept in a comment. The commit message says "Make compile cleanly with stack --pedantic", so it again does not seem like the restriction to Review was intentional.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The OpenApiItems prisms section defines
Review
s, notPrism
s. I assume that's a mistake? APrism
is aReview
but not the other way around, so this is needlessly limiting.In the history of the file, I see that
Prism
s used to be generated usingmakePrisms
, but in cd3dc81 themakePrisms
was replaced with a manualprism
definition... with aReview
type signature. The commit message says "fix build by manually writing out SwaggerItems prisms", so it does not seem like the restriction toReview
was intentional.Later on, in 68e95a6, the
prism
implementation was changed to anunto
, which does produce aReview
, but the second direction of theprism
implementation was kept in a comment. The commit message says "Make compile cleanly with stack --pedantic", so it again does not seem like the restriction toReview
was intentional.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: