microsoft / microsoft/TypeScript
Suggestion: consolidate generics in union if they match
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Go
- Stars
- 111k
- Forks
- 14.3k
- Avg merge
- 2d 4h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 132
Description
TypeScript Version: 3.5.2
Search Terms: rxjs startWith generics union consolidate same
Code
declare const create: <T>(
t: T,
) => {
startWith: <D>(v1: D) => T | D;
};
// Succeeds
// $ExpectType { foo: number } | { bar: number }
const r1 = create({ foo: 1 }).startWith({ bar: 1 });
// Fails
// $ExpectType { foo: number }
// Actual: { foo: number } | { foo: number }
const r2 = create({ foo: 1 }).startWith({ foo: 1 });
Although the expected/actual types are compatible, it's slightly irritating to deal with a union type T | T instead of a consolidated type T, as it makes type inspection in VS Code much more difficult (especially when the types are large or deeply nested).
Real world use case: https://github.com/ReactiveX/rxjs/issues/4866
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reproducing the provided create/startWith example with TypeScript 3.5.2 and inspect the inferred types for r1 and r2. Investigate the type-checking path responsible for unions of identical generic results; done means the matching union is represented as a single type without changing the distinct-union case.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- typescript
- Domain
- compilers
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100