fix: type error in access client types #940
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This has been red for a bit, but I assumed it was superfluous until I saw the error in a downstream project I was working on earlier today. I don't fully understand why this fixes the error I was seeing, but a) it does and b) I don't see much value in the generic type here. Pushing this up to start a discussion about whether this is an acceptable way to fix this issue - would love any thoughts on a better way to fix if anyone has ideas!
|
fixed in #962 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This has had red squigglies in VSCode for a bit, but I assumed it was superfluous until I saw the error in a downstream project I was working on earlier today:
The issue seems to stem from the generic type
RonInvokeOptions- when I use the reifiedResourcerather than the genericRit goes away.With
R:With
Resource:I don't fully understand why this fixes the error I was seeing, but a) it does and b) I don't see much value in the generic type here.
Pushing this up to start a discussion about whether this is an acceptable way to fix this issue - would love any thoughts on a better way to fix if anyone has ideas!