Cody Johnson

Thanks for your input @drk-mtr! > If I was making a custom element, I'd be doing it the Fable.React way for now. I took a look at building things "the...

Yeah I'm not against that idea, it also keeps things synchronized.

Yeah that's a pretty convincing argument imo. I *think* we can reduce the clutter a fair bit due to how the library is already structured. All (or the vast majority)...

To see why we use `unbox` when possible consider this: `box`/`unbox` is erased at compile time since it's JS. Doing `string i` compiles into this: ```fsharp // fable-library export function...

Since most likely Fable 3 will involve a significant re-write, I think that's an opportune time to do this work while we fix the other issues @Zaid-Ajaj mentioned above. We're...

It would be great if there was a way to tree-shake type data that isn't used. Then this becomes a non-issue

@alfonsogarciacaro think you could give me guidance on where to start with implementing this? I'd be willing to try a PR if I had a better idea of where to...

I've explored [quite a bit](https://github.com/Shmew/Fable.Jester/blob/master/src/Fable.FastCheck/Arb.fs#L1004) with what we can currently reflect when making fast-check bindings for fable. > System.Activator is supported in the latest version of Fable Yeah, that's what...

So my use-case is I want to be able to automatically generate an arbitrary of any type using default primitive arbitraries (if necessary). So for example if they have something...

Yeah all the types would be known at compile time, that would be great!