32 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2020
    1. Thanks so much for the reply! Due to space limitations for comments, I have appended my reply to my original question. Thanks again! (P.S. I can't up-vote your reply until my rep hits 15... Sorry about that.)
    1. It won't work in all use cases, but it's better than the div soup.
    2. I run into this on almost every project and end up doing this as a workaround: :global([slot="content"]) This allows me to style that extra div in the component that contains the slots but it would be super nice to have <MyComponent slot="content"/> and eliminate that extra div
    3. If this is getting implemented, I think I'll love to see both implemented. I can see a lot of use cases where I would like to encapsulate the component with additional wrappers and in another scenarios I would like to just use the component. Now i work around this using empty div but then at times it breaks the structure because of the div element and I'll have to add more class utilities to make it work. This will be a great addition for Svelte.
  2. Oct 2020
    1. But also, if you do want to use separate functions and have your dependencies still counted, you can make all of the relevant dependencies be arguments to those functions, so the compiler can see them in the reactive block.
    1. We aim to support all svelte features. In some cases this is not possible. For those cases we provided feasible workarounds.
    2. jsx currently does not allow to use : in attribute/property names. As a workaround every : can be replaced be _ (for example bind_value is converted to bind:value for svelte).
  3. Sep 2020
    1. Also, I'm starting to wonder if maybe it's okay to have multiple spreads? If the alternative to <Foo {...a} {...b} {...c} d={42}> is that people will write <Foo {...Object.assign({}, a, b, c)} d={42}> anyway, then do we gain anything with the constraint?
  4. Jul 2020
    1. Creating and calling a default proc is a waste of time, and Cramming everything into one line using tortured constructs doesn't make the code more efficient--it just makes the code harder to understand.

      The nature of this "answer" is a comment in response to another answer. But because of the limitations SO puts on comments (very short length, no multi-line code snippets), comment feature could not actually be used, so this user resorted to "abusing" answer feature to post their comment instead.

      See

  5. May 2020
  6. Jan 2020
    1. ssh doesn't let you specify a command precisely, as you have done, as a series of arguments to be passed to execvp on the remote host. Instead it concatenates all the arguments into a string and runs them through a remote shell. This stands out as a major design flaw in ssh in my opinion... it's a well-behaved unix tool in most ways, but when it comes time to specify a command it chose to use a single monolithic string instead of an argv, like it was designed for MSDOS or something!
  7. Dec 2019
    1. This problem can also come up when you use npm link or an equivalent. In that case, your bundler might “see” two Reacts — one in application folder and one in your library folder. Assuming myapp and mylib are sibling folders, one possible fix is to run npm link ../myapp/node_modules/react from mylib. This should make the library use the application’s React copy.
  8. Nov 2019