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
I'd like to suggest that instead using index to map the attach step to the steps array, it'll be more flexible to use a key/name for the attachStep, and the steps array just referencnes the key. This way, it's easy to rearrange the order of the steps just by rearranging the steps array, instead of renumbering the AttachSteps all around the application.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Thank you very much for the suggestion. I like the idea; I have been thinking about this for some time now. The main challenge is keeping type safety around the keys and the steps, but it's not a blocker. As you mentioned, using keys instead of indexes has more than one benefit. We'll put this under our scope next.
I'd like to suggest that instead using index to map the attach step to the steps array, it'll be more flexible to use a key/name for the attachStep, and the steps array just referencnes the key. This way, it's easy to rearrange the order of the steps just by rearranging the steps array, instead of renumbering the AttachSteps all around the application.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: