Found from #55916.
Today if you try to write a generic constructor, captured type parameters fail to create a generic signature. Instead, the type parameter is effectively leaked and never instantiated.
/** * @template T */classC{/** * @overload * @param {T} value *//** * @overload * @param {T} first * @param {T} second *//** * @param {T} first * @param {T} [second] */constructor(first,second){}}constx=newC(123);// ~~~// Argument of type 'number' is not assignable to parameter of type 'T'.// 'T' could be instantiated with an arbitrary type which could be unrelated to 'number'.consty=newC("hello","world");// ~~~~~~~// Argument of type 'string' is not assignable to parameter of type 'T'.// 'T' could be instantiated with an arbitrary type which could be unrelated to 'string'.The current-workaround is to write something like the following:
/** * @template T */classC{/** * @template T * @overload * @param {T} value * @return {C<T>} *//** * @template T * @overload * @param {T} first * @param {T} second * @return {C<T>} *//** * @param {T} first * @param {T} [second] */constructor(first,second){}}constx=newC(123);// ^?consty=newC("hello","world");// ^?consty=newC(123,"hello");// ^?Notice that here, each @overload must declare its own type parameters and return type.
We should decide if this is actually how we want @overload to work in JSDoc on constructor declarations.
Found from #55916.
Today if you try to write a generic constructor, captured type parameters fail to create a generic signature. Instead, the type parameter is effectively leaked and never instantiated.
The current-workaround is to write something like the following:
Notice that here, each
@overloadmust declare its own type parameters and return type.We should decide if this is actually how we want
@overloadto work in JSDoc onconstructordeclarations.