George

Is there no better way to avoid this warning? @cbdeveloper 's solution works, but it feels like I'm going out of my way to change code just to please the...

Ok, after some learning on the horrible way that `this` works in JavaScript, I found a solution that fits my needs. To avoid destructuring the `props` object you have to...

I also vote to re-open the issue if it's possible to fix. My co-workers are all ignoring this warning because there's no convenient way to make it happy, especially if...

@gaearon I've started calling `props.someFunction.call(undefined, someArguments)` to avoid this issue. It's slightly annoying since I never rely on `this` in any functions, but it's a fairly easy habit to get...

An `ignoreThis` option would be very useful I think. Although at this point I've gotten used to writing `props.someFunc.call(undefined)`.

As a workaround I added this code in a Types.ts file ``` declare module '@analytics/google-analytics' { type GoogleAnalyticsOptions = { /** Google Analytics site tracking Id */ trackingId:string; /** Enable...

Just some ideas: the way I've seen other libraries do it is to have a separate folders. If the code is completely different between the 2 this makes a lot...

Hi guys any updates on this?

It's nice to finally know what the cause of this was. I knew it had something to do with optional chaining and conditional operators but couldn't figure it out. There's...

@shindeajinkya I noticed that for some reason ternary operations seem to count as way more “points” against the maximum number of code paths than expected. So you can solve this...