-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 31
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update changelog since v2.0.2 #75
Conversation
CHANGELOG.md
Outdated
|
||
Bugfixes: | ||
|
||
Other improvements: | ||
- Updated `Record.Builder.merge` and `Record.Builder.union` to override existing fields (#73) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this change is breaking? @kl0tl could you clarify?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This changes the behaviour of Record.Builder.merge and Record.Builder.union, so that
build (merge { x: 1, y: "y" }) { y: 2, z: true }
has now type
{ x :: Int, y :: String, z :: Boolean }
-- instead of
{ x :: Int, y :: Int, z :: Boolean }
and
build (union { x: 1, y: "y" }) { y: 2, z: true }
has now type
{ x :: Int, y :: String, y :: Int, z :: Boolean }
-- instead of
{ x :: Int, y :: Int, y :: String, z :: Boolean }
This is indeed a breaking change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I edited Cyril's comment above to make the differences easier to see.
@kl0tl What's a good way to summarize this change?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What do you think of:
Updated
Record.Builder.merge
andRecord.Builder.union
so that they behave likeRecord.merge
andRecord.union
: fields from the argument override those of the record being built in case of overlaps.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sounds good to me.
This looks good otherwise |
Description of the change
This PR updates the CHANGELOG in preparation for the upcoming release of this library.
Related: purescript/purescript#3985