Nitpick at dynamic fields example#140
Open
alilloig wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
Add an extra clarification pointing out that objects added as df do not need to have key ability, since that's the main difference between df and dof
Collaborator
|
I agree that it makes sense to mark |
Contributor
Author
|
My point was that you could see that df can own objects since But as I said, absolut nitpick! |
This file contains hidden or 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Since that's the main difference between objects stored as df and objects stored as dof is that the former do not need to have the key ability, I believe is worth clarifying that on the example, or at least not having both objects that are gonna be used for df having
key.