Type fixes #49
Merged
Type fixes #49
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
When I was adding more explicit typing for the modifier callbacks I typed them as void since we didn't use the result in the functions. This left existing code that used the modifier with an arrow function producing static analysis errors since they return the rule from the function. To fix it I made the modifier argument support functions that return void or the expected rule, then treat it as mutable when void is returned and replace the rule when not (most rules are mutable so this will have no effect in most cases, it is just in case someone replaces completely in the modifier).