Generic `Delta<T>`? about delta HOT 5 OPEN

Hey @alecgibson 👋,

Thanks for raising this up! I think in practice, you would get delta data from your database and you still have to perform a force casting (Delta<unknown> as Delta<MyOp>) anyway so I don't think it worth the effort to make it generic.

from delta.

My point was more that you can simplify your casting by moving the cast to the Delta level, so you cast just once (on data retrieval), and then after that you're working with a well-typed object, and don't have to cast every time you access an attribute.

from delta.

While this is indeed convenient, the actual data you get may not necessarily conform to your type definition (e.g. due to bugs or data format upgrades), and supporting generics can easily lead developers to overlook this issue. In practice, I'd recommended using typeof attributes.header === 'number' to narrow down the type, although as you said, it is more verbose. Another issue I'm considering is the support for the embed format (op.insert.image). If we provide generics for Op, then it would make no sense not to provide generics for the embed format as well.

from delta.

I'll admit embeds do complicate things, and yes I'd agree we'd want generics for that, too if we did attributes.

If there's no appetite for this, that's fair enough. Thought I'd just float the idea because I know I get bored of constantly casting, but maybe I'm just lazier than most 😛

from delta.

For me I tend to use type guards for attributes and type force casts for embed values as attributes are generally simple values. Probably you may want to define a custom utility function getAttributes(op: Op): MyAttributes to avoid casting.

from delta.