Drop support for TransitionsConfigArray#4123
Conversation
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 822fe64 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
|
This pull request is automatically built and testable in CodeSandbox. To see build info of the built libraries, click here or the icon next to each commit SHA. Latest deployment of this branch, based on commit 822fe64:
|
| // 'script-src': ['test0', 'test1', 'test2', 'test3'], // <script/> conversion not implemented | ||
| 'scxml-prefix-event-name-matching': [ | ||
| 'star0' | ||
| // 'star0' // this relies on the source order of transitions where * is first and it's supposed to get macthed over an explicit descriptor |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you think there is value in supporting this use-case?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think so - it makes visualization less obvious. If somebody really needs smth like this they can always divide their state into 2 nested ones and put "higher priority" transitions in the inner one.

I think that:
TransitionsConfigArraycomplicated our typesThis PR is not meant to refactor all inner bits. The main goal here was to remove this from the types and the public API, the internals could still use some further cleanups but that can be done at any time.