microsoft / microsoft/TypeScript
Suggestion: Allow interfaces to "implement" (vs extend) other interfaces
Dieses Issue hat noch niemand übernommen.
- Vorherrschende Sprache
- Go
- Sterne
- 111k
- Forks
- 14.3k
- Ø Merge
- 1 T. 19 Std.
- Gemergte PRs (30 T.)
- 117
Beschreibung
Search Terms
interface, implements
Suggestion
Allow declaring that an interface "implements" another interface or interfaces, which means the compiler checks conformance, but unlike the "extends" clause, no members are inherited:
interface Foo {
foo(): void;
}
interface Bar implements Foo {
foo(): void; // must be present to satisfy type-checker
bar(): void;
}
Use Cases
It is very common for one interface to be an "extension" of another, but the "extends" keyword is not a universal way to make this fact explicit in code. Because of structural typing, the fact that one interface is assignable to another is true with or without "extends," so you might say the "extends" keyword serves primarily to inherit members, and secondarily to document and enforce the relationship between the two types. Inheriting members comes with a readability trade-off and is not always desirable, so it would be useful to be able to document and enforce the relationship between two interfaces without inheriting members.
Consider code such as:
import { GestureHandler } from './GestureHandler'
import { DropTarget } from './DropTarget'
export interface DragAndDropHandler extends GestureHandler {
updateDropTarget(dropTarget: DropTaget): void;
}
function createDragAndDropHandler(/*...*/): DragAndDropHandler {
//...
}
While this code is not bad, it is notable that DragAndDropHandler omits some of its members simply because it has a relationship with GestureHandler. What are those members? What if I would like to declare them explicitly, just as I would if GestureHandler didn't exist, or if DragAndDropHandler were a class that implemented GestureHandler? I could write them in, but the compiler won't check that I have included all of them. I could omit extends GestureHandler, but then the type-checking will happen where DragAndDropHandler is used as a GestureHandler, not where it is defined.
What I really want to do is be explicit about — and have the compiler check — that I am specifying all members of this interface, and also that it conforms to GestureHandler.
I would like to be able to write:
export interface DragAndDropHandler implements GestureHandler {
updateDropTarget(dropTarget: DropTaget): void;
move(gestureInfo: GestureInfo): void
finish(gestureInfo: GestureInfo, success: boolean): void
}
Examples
See above
Checklist
My suggestion meets these guidelines:
- This wouldn't be a breaking change in existing TypeScript / JavaScript code
- This wouldn't change the runtime behavior of existing JavaScript code
- This could be implemented without emitting different JS based on the types of the expressions
- This isn't a runtime feature (e.g. new expression-level syntax)
Beitragsleitfaden
Erste Schritte
- Lies das ganze Issue und danach den Beitragsleitfaden des Projekts.
- Schreib ins Issue, dass du es übernimmst — das erspart doppelte Arbeit.
- Forke das Repository und arbeite in einem Branch.
- Öffne einen Pull Request, der die Issue-Nummer nennt.
Rechercherichtung
Der Issue nennt keine Dateien oder Tests. Beginne damit nachzuverfolgen, wie der Compiler Deklarationen von interface extends verarbeitet, und die Diskussion auf ein vereinbartes Design zu prüfen; definiere anschließend Konformität ohne Vererbung von Membern. Füge Compiler-Tests hinzu, die die Beispiele abdecken, und überprüfe, dass die neue Syntax die erforderlichen Member prüft, ohne das erzeugte JavaScript zu ändern.
Vom Indexierungsmodell aus dem Issue-Text verfasst.
Bewertung
- Tech-Stack
- typescript
- Bereich
- compilers
- Issue-Typ
- Feature
- Schwierigkeit
- 5/5
- Geschätzter Aufwand
- Über eine Woche
- Aktivitätsstatus
- Veraltet
- Klarheit
- Größtenteils klar
- Anfängerfreundlichkeit
- 35/100