Joe Pea
Joe Pea
> The solution in this case, based on the original design intent of `MutationObserver` is that you should be using a single `MutationObserver` to monitor both insertion & removal. There...
> Mutation observer can observe a node as long as you call `observe` function on it regardless of whether the node was a part of some other subtree or not....
> I'm not sure what to make of this issue. That we need a new and better API, like in the hypothetical `ChildObserver` examples above that were proposed as possible...
The OP mentions in title text "Possible Solutions", then in a further comment (not very far below) there are two "Possible Solution" sections also in title text. Easy to miss.
These issues all seem to be related to the same underlying problem: https://github.com/pqrs-org/Karabiner-Elements/issues/3110 (this one is particularly suspicious) https://github.com/pqrs-org/Karabiner-Elements/issues/2981 https://github.com/pqrs-org/Karabiner-Elements/issues/2866 https://github.com/pqrs-org/Karabiner-Elements/issues/2401
Maybe another clue, but this doesn't look right:
> Is it waiting for something? My guess is it's waiting for someone who values this with high enough priority over other features to make a pull request. :smiley: Does...
Just a note, but #2845 is similar but different. This one is not about making a getter/setter, but about making only a property, and being able to specify that the...
Neat to know how other languages do this. @woubuc Your idea is great if we need to prevent from adding new keywords. With the new keywords I suggested we can...