microsoft / microsoft/TypeScript
Conflicting definitions for Set constructor causes unexpected default generic in TS 3.5
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Go
- Stars
- 111k
- Forks
- 14.3k
- Avg merge
- 2d 4h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 132
Description
TypeScript Version: 3.4.5 vs versions after 3.5
Search Terms: set constructor setconstructor unknown
Code
let s = new Set();
Expected behavior:
In TS 3.4: we expect the default chosen param to give us a Set<{}>.
In TS 3.5: we expect a Set<unknown>.
That change was an intended change in TS 3.5.
Or, if Set has a default generic arg, I expect the same default chosen in 3.4 and 3.5.
Actual behavior:
In TS 3.4, this actually was a Set<any>!
It appears there are multiple overloads of the Set constructor.
lib.es2015.collection.d.ts says:
new <T = any>(values?: ReadonlyArray<T> | null): Set<T>;
while lib.es2105.iterable.d.ts says:
new <T>(iterable?: Iterable<T> | null): Set<T>;
Note that one has T = any and the other doesn't.
So somehow TS 3.4 vs TS 3.5 decided to change whether to obey the any default, I think?
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 comparing the Set constructor overloads in lib.es2015.collection.d.ts and lib.es2105.iterable.d.ts, then reproduce the supplied new Set() example under TypeScript 3.4.5 and 3.5. Done means the constructor declarations and generic inference agree with the intended behavior across the affected versions.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- typescript
- Domain
- compilers
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100