Sultan

@mweststrate Couldn't you handle this with `t.throws(fn, expected, msg)`? Though from the repo it doesn't look like it would/should make it to the error boundary ~~since it might be a...

@gaearon Could this also apply to async operations that emit errors like `setState` function/callback pattern.

>Support promise as a component type Related to this, when you have: ```js const PromiseType = new Promise(() => {}) class A extends Component { componentDidMount() {} componentDidUpdate() {} render()...

>In this proposal Symbol.private can be hijacked to observe private symbol creation. This point keeps coming up, but i think any syntax you could come up with to mitigate this...

>or your code executes before the other code so you could modify the environment to take control of the execution of the code-to-be-executed, so you can parse and evaluate the...

Thenables would cover more future ground as far as future interop between observables/promises are concerned. @Havunen DIO allows you to return a Promise/thenable from componentWillUnmount that defers unmounting of the...

@trueadm Promises resolving async is what you would want in this case. Paired with `Node.animate` and the `onfinnish` event would allow you to design declarative unmount animations around this. ```js...

@trueadm The lifecycle flow is sync in the DIO's implementation, the only aspect that is async is the resulting native DOM nodes removal and that too is only when `componentWillUnmount`...

>Or do you append the next one and then call remove for the node1 later? @Havunen Something like this, Instead of `replaceNode` i create **domNode2** and `insertBefore` **domNode1**, then remove...

Sorry i wasn't clear. The most recent releases all have the same issue, the issue however is traced to have started after version 3.2.9 so all versions after that, that...