Post

Replies

Boosts

Views

Activity

Reply to .messages.message reaction field type vs. error from macro
Hi Albert, thanks for the routing tip, filed as FB23203177 The full reproduction, the four type variants I tried, the actual working @UnionValue / customReaction pattern from UnicornChat, and the two doc/diagnostic suggestions from the forum post are all in the FB body so the AppIntents and Documentation teams have everything inline. The placeholder itself is in the schema-template comment generated by the @AppEntity(schema: .messages.message) macro expansion — Xcode surfaces it as the editable <#ReadReaction#> token when you accept the fix-it for the missing reaction property. It's not in the prose docs (you were right that it's missing there), only in the macro-emitted stub the IDE inserts. Happy to test any patch or doc revision once it lands. Lukas
1h
Reply to .messages.message reaction field type vs. error from macro
Hi Albert, thanks for the routing tip, filed as FB23203177 The full reproduction, the four type variants I tried, the actual working @UnionValue / customReaction pattern from UnicornChat, and the two doc/diagnostic suggestions from the forum post are all in the FB body so the AppIntents and Documentation teams have everything inline. The placeholder itself is in the schema-template comment generated by the @AppEntity(schema: .messages.message) macro expansion — Xcode surfaces it as the editable <#ReadReaction#> token when you accept the fix-it for the missing reaction property. It's not in the prose docs (you were right that it's missing there), only in the macro-emitted stub the IDE inserts. Happy to test any patch or doc revision once it lands. Lukas
Replies
Boosts
Views
Activity
1h