John Rom

@flora8984461 you should be able to resolve that warning with the slightly odd syntax: `const [, meta] = useField(props);`. You don't have to assign each variable during destructuring, you can...

V3 will expose `useFieldMeta(name)`. It is the same as getFieldMeta, but as a hook. I think we should still revisit why fieldMeta isn't being passed automatically, since we have already...

I like the added properties, and I would lean towards the `Is*` versions. However, I wonder if this will be too limiting. Imagine I have a code-first content type, but...

My initial thought is: - `ContentItem.As()` - `GetContentItemByIdAsync(id)`

Just a few notes here: SPA is a multi-headed beast. There are three main types of SPA: ## 1: Client-rendered This is when the browser gets a blank page with...

@ShaunKT this is expected behavior. Setting an input's value to undefined sets the input's `value={undefined}` which in React means it is an uncontrolled input and React will not perform an...

You can also create your own version of Field which does something like: ```jsx const TextInput = (fieldProps) => { const [field] = useField(fieldProps); return } ``` Or in v3...

Making the dev perform the validation outside of the Formik validation API causes a huge issue when it comes time to submit, and for dependent fields. What happens when `submitForm()`...

@joepuzzo how would you accomplish the above without async validation? I agree it'd make life a million times easier from a maintenance point of view, but I think generally code...

I guess I didn't get my point across in my example above. The problem is two-fold. a) managing validation state within Formik (informed does this) b) using the same validation...