flat-insurance-2529401/04/2020, 10:27 PM
which is probably not what you want. If you can share the context of how you are trying to use this - there is frequently an alternative way to structure things that can avoid the need to know the length of the array promptly.
flat-insurance-2529401/05/2020, 1:17 AM
while I have
Can I assume in the future that they will work interchangeably or is this just a fluke?
would work with something that expects
Notice the distinction, one is a promise of Array<String> the other is Array of Promises containing String.
on the outside. That is why.
flat-insurance-2529401/05/2020, 2:21 AM
flat-insurance-2529401/05/2020, 2:24 AM
But I hand it an
They are different, but I am sure you tackle it somehow, but from a type safety point of view, I don’t think it’s sound.
. (Technically that is one valid thing it accepts, but it accepts many others including
. If you expand out both Inputs into each of the three options in the Union you get a total of 9 options, one of them is exactly the thing you have.
flat-insurance-2529401/05/2020, 2:29 AM
flat-insurance-2529401/08/2020, 4:57 PM