Titus

@alecmev Friendly ping! Do you have answers to my questions?

I previously assumed that we’d add component support to `h`: ```js h(Component, props?, ...Array) ``` But we could also *just* add it to the automatic runtime: https://github.com/syntax-tree/hastscript/blob/2f8c133920fa57405815de3f3cdc21d1bc892444/lib/runtime.js#L31 Because the main...

> xastscript What problems are you thinking off? -- @alecmev I think I’d be open to a PR! Interested in working on it?

@alecmev Friendly ping! Something you’d like to work on?

@alecmev Ping! 🔔 :)

Sounds like something @remcohaszing has ideas on!

As far as I understand the above comments, then it would be bad to do this? And exposing `HResult` is an adequate solution?

I’m up for exposing `HResult`, I don’t see downsides. @alecmev Interested in working on a PR?

Released in [7.1.0](https://github.com/syntax-tree/hastscript/releases/tag/7.1.0)! I noticed that HChild, HProperties, were also exposed as `Child` and `Properties`, so I used `Result` as the type name for this

It is intentional and document that you can’t provide certain options: https://github.com/syntax-tree/hast-util-to-html#optionsentities. That’s because passing those options breaks HTML. I don’t see the value in letting users create broken output....