Mikael Sand

The linter was complaining about the Cache import being type only (it only exported a namespace), so fixing that caused the export snapshot to fail, so had to remove it,...

Ok, I think another option to making these private methods public is to make them properly private, i.e. using the `#fnName() {}` and `#member = somevalue;` syntax. I think then...

Scratch that, # syntax has same issue: ```shell TS2322: Type Hermes is not assignable to type InMemoryCache Property #broadcastWatch in type Hermes refers to a different member that cannot be...

@phryneas I have a version which just removes the private and protected modifiers now, doesn't make them public. In practice all of these are accessible using string property indexers already...

Hmm, seems this is mostly a matter of style no? Could use the explicit public modifier to indicate stable / public apis you wish to support. Can't see any technical...

@phryneas Hello again :) So another strategy, no more publicly exposed methods or fields 😄 While keeping everything accessible where necessary. Would this be an acceptable direction?

Well ignoring type issues in tests is one thing, that is quite fine. But I'd like to get it such that end users can provide instances of Hermes to any...

Well instanceof saying that Hermes isn't an instance of InMemoryCache is fine, what I'm looking for is interface level compatibility at the public api level of InMemoryCache. One of the...

@jerelmiller Well for now I don't know if anyone else even knows about my fork, I suspect most people looking at Hermes nowadays discard it immediately due to lack of...

@jerelmiller Yes, I'm quite aware of the difference between interface and implementation, I've been doing software development for more than twenty years and have a masters degree in computer science,...