You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I am currently using the R3 library and have noticed that only generic versions of ReactiveCommand are available (ReactiveCommand<T>). It would be very helpful to have a non-generic version of ReactiveCommand as well.
Current Situation:
• Only ReactiveCommand<T> is available.
• Every time I need to use a command without a specific type, I have to write ReactiveCommand<Unit>, which is inconvenient.
Requested Feature:
• Introduce a non-generic ReactiveCommand in addition to the existing ReactiveCommand<T>.
• Allow the following syntax: public ReactiveCommand Command { get; }.
Benefits:
• Simplifies the code when no command parameter is needed.
It would be greatly appreciated if the library could be updated to include this feature. Thank you!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I am currently using the R3 library and have noticed that only generic versions of
ReactiveCommand
are available (ReactiveCommand<T>
). It would be very helpful to have a non-generic version ofReactiveCommand
as well.Current Situation:
• Only
ReactiveCommand<T>
is available.• Every time I need to use a command without a specific type, I have to write
ReactiveCommand<Unit>
, which is inconvenient.Requested Feature:
• Introduce a non-generic
ReactiveCommand
in addition to the existingReactiveCommand<T>
.• Allow the following syntax:
public ReactiveCommand Command { get; }
.Benefits:
• Simplifies the code when no command parameter is needed.
It would be greatly appreciated if the library could be updated to include this feature. Thank you!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: