Illia Chaban

`+ 1` to improve documentation or show some kind of warning or error on compile if this is not supported. Otherwise, it silently breaks many styles

Here's maybe a better example ``` const finalData = pipeWith(array1, array2 && concat(array2)) ``` Without using function approach & followiing immutability principles, this would look like this ``` const finalData...

Update: if i pass a function that returns JSXElement instead of JSXElement instead, it works Although i don't think it's a fully expected behavior and I would still expect passing...

@mdynnl how is this expected? From the DX point of view it doesn't make much sense and this behavior is not documented anywhere. Thanks for explaining on why it doesn't...

why can't i generate a new elements and not append them to the DOM? Why can't they be hydrated as part of the javascript?

@princox just use [vscode-styled-components](https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=styled-components.vscode-styled-components) vs code extension

actually, this seems to have the same behavior for manual routes: ``` const Landing = lazy(() => import('./routes/index')); const About = lazy(() => import('./routes/about')); export default function App() { return...

@brenelz there's a stackblitz link you to project you can fork (top right corner): https://codesandbox.io/p/devbox/423f4v I don't find this behavior intuitive. In my mind, when i pass `` as `props.children`...