Open lindhe opened 2 months ago
Alternatively, we can change it to something more helpful. But if type=null
in each example, I'm not sure what that contributes.
[…] the
type
in this case is indeednull
, as in thenull
builder, not as "undefined". I can completely understand that this is misleading though, and this deserves to be updated with more concrete examples thannull
to avoid that misunderstanding.
Ah, thanks for clarifying! That makes sense, I guess, just that it is pretty awkward to print it out on each line despite it never changing. Maybe just make a print like builder type {builder.type}
on a separate line? Or perhaps there is some other builder we could use as another example…
Do you want to take a jab at this change? I can take this on otherwise, please let me know how you'd prefer to proceed here.
Thanks for asking. I'm usually happy to contribute, but I feel like I don't quite understand the purpose of this example so it's hard for me to make an improved example. No hard feelings if you ditch this PR and make a better example. 🙂
If type is always equal to null, it feels like an irrelevant example to bring up.