Design Meeting Notes, 1/20/2017

[DanielRosenwasser]

Defaults for generic type parameters (#13487)

• Ron Buckton (@rbuckton) decided to revisit this.
• Allows defaults in type parameters in classes, interfaces, function signatures.
• Rules
  • Required type parameters cannot not follow optional type parameters.
  • Type parameters can't have defaults which circularly reference themselves.
  • Defaults must satisfy their constraints.
  • A class or interface may introduce a default for an existing type parameter - the analogous entities merge.
  • When performing type argument inference, and a type argument with a default lacks any candidates, instead of {}, use the default type.
• What about the following?

  interface I {
   x: T
  }
  
  interface I<T = number> {
   // ...
  }

  • Currently means that x: T refers to the type parameter.
  • Seems absolutely wrong that that should even occur.
  • Maybe let's just make that an error because it's ambiguous.
• Current implementation seems to always perform inference, even if type arguments are entirely supplied.
  • Fix that.
• Why even perform inference if you have a type parameter default?
  • Because inference can do better.
• What are some motivating use-cases?
  • The overloads for then and catch in Promise which just don't work in subtle ways.
    • We keep trying to patch them up, default type parameters seem to fix this.
  • A React.Component which doesn't use its this.state
    • DR: Is it a hazard if people don't know about type parameter defaults, but do want a typed state?
      • RC: state can still be overridden in the subclass.
        • RC: But then parameter on setState will still be any. :(
          • DR: But then we could have setState's parameter typed as this["state"]! 👍

Resolution: Sounds good so far, let's take a look at the PR!

Mixins and Extending generic type parameters (#4890)

• People have often asked for the ability to extend a type parameter.

  interface Foo<T> extends T {
   // ...
  }

  • Problem: extends today currently implies that TypeScript will perform some type-checking to see if members in the current type are compatible with those in the derived type.
  • If we can't give errors up-front, we can't give certain guarantees, which would not be good.
  • Currently, the work done does not allow you to extend from type-parameters.
  • However, we allow you to intersect the types (i.e. using the & operator), and the behavior is well-defined for conflicting members (just recursively intersect).
    • This is mostly fine, but we don't allow users to inherit from constructors that return intersection types.

• New changes

  • Allow clases to inherit from things that construct object types or intersection types.
  • Allow interfaces to extend from both object types and intersection types.
  • Allow classes to implement from both object types and intersection types.

• These new changes allow users to reconcile difficulties when mixing and matching interfaces which extend, and type aliases which intersect.

  • Great! Less friction.
  • Means you can inherit from Partial<T> and Readonly<T>!

• Difficulty: intersections previously never adjusted the this type of intersected members.

  interface A {
   x: this;
  }
  
  interface B {
   y: this;
  }
  
  // Expected to work, previously an error.
  declare let foo: A & B;
  a.x.y;
  x.y.x

  • We now instantiate the this type with the intersection itself.
    • This is great - mixins can actually be modeled more easily because the this type can be carried onward.

  // Something constructable.
  type Constructor<T> = new (...args: any[]) => T;
  
  // Strip out signatures from types.
  type Props<T> = { [P in keyof T]: T[P] };
  
  declare function Mixin<B, BC, M, MC>(base: Constructor<B> & BC, mixin: Constructor<M> & MC): Constructor<B & C> & Props<BC & MC>;

• [[Too many samples to effectively jot notes...]]

• So mixins could be sort of modeled, but there's still some weird stuff that needs to be handled with construct signatures.

  • Effectively would be magic from the perspective of the user.
  • Basically want to inherit the construct list from the base, and potentially tack on any required parameters in the derived constructor.

  function identifiable<S extends new (...args: any[]) => any)>(superClass: S) {
   return class extends superClass {
   _id: string;
   static superStatic: string;
   constructor(id, ...args) {
   super(...args);
   this._id = id;
   }
   }
  }

  • Basically rephrased: what is the type of args that type-checks? What construct signatures are produced on the new class?
  • We can think of this down the line.