feat: add console hook to static template#943
Draft
SSHari wants to merge 1 commit intocodesandbox:mainfrom
Draft
feat: add console hook to static template#943SSHari wants to merge 1 commit intocodesandbox:mainfrom
SSHari wants to merge 1 commit intocodesandbox:mainfrom
Conversation
|
@SSHari is attempting to deploy a commit to the CodeSandbox Team on Vercel. A member of the Team first needs to authorize it. |
|
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 9f181b4:
|
4 tasks
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
An alternative solution to #908, based on the conversations found in the PR draft #909.
I'm not sure if adding new message types like this is ok to do, but it seems much simpler than what I was trying to do in the original implementation. That said, I'm fine with waiting on any changes until we confirm this is functionality that people actually want.
It's ok if we want to close this PR as won't do, but I just wanted to put together an example of what I was talking about in the other PR draft to help further any discussions.