Mike Pearson

I expect the most common use case for sinks is where a dev will import a sink someone else defined. StateAdapt can provide a `localStorageSink` as it will be extremely...

Now I'm wondering if this could be done with the existing API. ```typescript const user = adapt(initialState, { sources: store => ({ noop: [getLocalStorageSink(store), getConsoleSink(store)], }, }); // vs const...

  I actually really like the idea of having the sink show up in DevTools. It's not an event, technically. So as an action it's not ideal. Originally I...

For now, yes. Eventually I want to create an official router sink + adapter

Doesn't TypeScript prevent passing a nested action in? I don't want to increase JS bundle size for something TypeScript already should do.

But I'm trying to think of ways to circumvent the nested nature of actions in the first place. It is one of the awkward parts of the StateAdapt API, although...

The nested nature of payloads I mean. The existence of action payloads in the first place. I'm 100% sure that if you try to pass in a nested action into...

This is just not the behavior you would expect. I imagine if I accept this PR, someday somebody will open an issue complaining that they can't create a source of...

I'm moving forward with the strategy I mentioned. Plain observables, but the `type` will be preserved as a property of sources, so I have a new `withType` function that will...

Oh yeah. For this one, the source code is long and not very pretty. I just put a link to the source code instead. Maybe I should make it look...