Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Consider index signatures as optional properties in contextual type discrimination - #54596
Merged
Merged
Conversation
| const filtered = contains(include, Ternary.False) ? getUnionType(types.filter((_, i) => include[i])) : target; | ||
| return filtered.flags & TypeFlags.Never ? target : filtered; | ||
| function getTypeOfPropertyOrOptionalIndexSignature(type: Type, name: __String): Type | undefined { |
MemberAuthor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I feel like this function might already exist, but I couldn't find it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's getTypeOfPropertyOrIndexSignature (used by narrowTypeByDiscriminant!). Consider replacing that function and making it take a parameter on whether to add optionality for index signatures.
MemberAuthor
TypeScript Bot (@typescript-bot) test this |
Contributor
Heya Gabriela Araujo Britto (@gabritto), I've started to run the parallelized Definitely Typed test suite on this PR at c66c0d1. You can monitor the build here. Update: The results are in! |
Contributor
Heya Gabriela Araujo Britto (@gabritto), I've started to run the diff-based user code test suite on this PR at c66c0d1. You can monitor the build here. Update: The results are in! |
Contributor
Heya Gabriela Araujo Britto (@gabritto), I've started to run the extended test suite on this PR at c66c0d1. You can monitor the build here. |
Contributor
Heya Gabriela Araujo Britto (@gabritto), I've started to run the perf test suite on this PR at c66c0d1. You can monitor the build here. Update: The results are in! |
Contributor
Heya Gabriela Araujo Britto (@gabritto), I've started to run the diff-based top-repos suite on this PR at c66c0d1. You can monitor the build here. Update: The results are in! |
TypeScript Bot (typescript-bot)
commented
Jun 10, 2023
Contributor
Gabriela Araujo Britto (@gabritto) Here are the results of running the user test suite comparing There were infrastructure failures potentially unrelated to your change:
Otherwise... Something interesting changed - please have a look. Details
|
TypeScript Bot (typescript-bot)
commented
Jun 10, 2023
Contributor
Gabriela Araujo Britto (@gabritto) Here they are:CompilerComparison Report - main..54596
System
Hosts
Scenarios
TSServerComparison Report - main..54596
System
Hosts
Scenarios
StartupComparison Report - main..54596
System
Hosts
Scenarios
Developer Information: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TypeScript Bot (typescript-bot)
commented
Jun 10, 2023
Contributor
Gabriela Araujo Britto (@gabritto) Here are the results of running the top-repos suite comparing Everything looks good! |
TypeScript Bot (typescript-bot)
commented
Jun 10, 2023
Contributor
Hey Gabriela Araujo Britto (@gabritto), the results of running the DT tests are ready. |
Gabriela Araujo Britto (gabritto)
requested review from
Jake Bailey (jakebailey) and Wesley Wigham (weswigham)June 12, 2023 18:15
Jake Bailey (jakebailey)
approved these changes
Jun 12, 2023
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Rodrigo Leitão (ImRodry)
commented
Jul 3, 2023
This didn't land in 5.1.6 right? When is it expected to be released? |
Jake Bailey (jakebailey)
commented
Jul 5, 2023
Member
This is in the 5.2 beta (also noted in the issue's milestone). |
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 freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
5 participants
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.
Fixes#54498.
The fix is suggested and described by Nebojša Cvetković (@nebkat) in this comment: #54498 (comment).
When we try to discriminate a contextual type, we consider the omission of a property to be a factor to discriminate in
discriminateTypeByDiscriminableItems's implementation, but then during that process, when looking up a property in one of the candidate types, we would not consider matching index signatures and therefore we would discard the type with the index signature. Now, when looking up a property in one of the candidate types, we also consider matching on index signatures.