Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 14, 2023. It is now read-only.

treatment of optionals #446

Closed
harrysolovay opened this issue Nov 30, 2022 · 1 comment
Closed

treatment of optionals #446

harrysolovay opened this issue Nov 30, 2022 · 1 comment

Comments

@harrysolovay
Copy link
Contributor

Ensure proper treatment of optionals:

  • Some RPC call return types should be unioned with null
  • The derived read example fails when utilizing a test ctx –– how do we want to handle optionals/non-existent entries? Should this be baked into the effect system (propagate the undefined)?
@tjjfvi
Copy link
Contributor

tjjfvi commented Feb 20, 2023

Fixed by #595

@tjjfvi tjjfvi closed this as completed Feb 20, 2023
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this to Properly Done in Capi Feb 20, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
Capi
Status: Done
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@harrysolovay @tjjfvi