Consider inferring class members types by implemented interface members (continuation of #340)

Continuation of #340, #1373, #5749, #6118, #10570, #16944, #23911.

Why a new issue?

Many previous issues discussed about having contextual types based on both extended base class members and implemented interface members. This proposal only applies to implements, not extends.

Discussions in #6118 ends with an edge case when a class extends a base class and implements another interface. I think this problem would not occur if the scope is limited to implements keyword only, and I believe would be a step forward from having parameters inferred as any.

Previous issues have been locked, making it impossible to continue the discussion as time passes.

Proposal

Using terminology “option 1”, “option 2”, “option 3” referring to this comment: https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/10570#issuecomment-296860943

• For members from extends keep option 1.
• For members from implements:
  • Use option 3 for non-function properties that don’t have type annotation.
  • Use option 2 for function properties and methods.

Examples

Code example in the linked comment:

    class C extends Base.Base implements Contract {
        item = createSubitem(); // ⬅️ No type annotation -- inferred as `Subitem`
    }

Since only the implements keyword is considered, item will be inferred as Subitem.

Example in https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/10570#issuecomment-296860943

interface I {
  kind: 'widget' | 'gadget';
}

class C implements I {
  kind = 'widget'; // ⬅️ No type annotation -- inferred as 'widget' | 'gadget'
}

// Above behavior is consistent with:
const c: I = {
  kind: 'widget' // ⬅️ c.kind is also 'widget' | 'gadget'
}

interface I {
  kind: 'widget' | 'gadget';
}

class C implements I {
  kind: 'widget' = 'widget'; // ⬅️ Explicit type annotation required to pin as 'widget'
}

Example in #16944:

interface IComponentLifecycle<P> {
  componentWillReceiveProps?(nextProps: Readonly<P>, nextContext: any): void;
}

interface IProps {
  hello: string;
}

class X implements IComponentLifecycle<IProps> {
  componentWillReceiveProps(nextProps) {
    //                      ^ Contextually typed as Readonly<IProps>
  }
}

Example in #340:

interface SomeInterface1 {
    getThing(x: string): Element;
}

interface SomeInterface2 {
    getThing(x: number): HTMLElement;   
}

declare class SomeClass implements SomeInterface1, SomeInterface2 {
    getThing(x) {
        //   ^ Contextually inferred from
        //     (SomeInterface1 & SomeInterface2)['getThing']
        //     As of TS 3.5, it is an implicit any.
    }
}

// Above behavior is consistent with:
const c: SomeInterface1 & SomeInterface2 = {
    getThing(x) {
        //   ^ Implicit any, as of TS 3.5
    },
}

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. library functionality, non-ECMAScript syntax with JavaScript output, etc.)
• This feature would agree with the rest of TypeScript's Design Goals.

Prüfe die vorherigen Issues und die verlinkte Diskussion, insbesondere #10570 und den in der Proposal referenzierten TypeScript-PR-Kommentar, um die drei Optionen für kontextuelle Typisierung zu verstehen. Vergleiche die aufgeführten Klassen- und Objektbeispiele und ermittle anschließend die Compiler-Tests und Implementierungseinstiegspunkte, die kontextuelle Typisierung abdecken. Als erledigt gilt die Aufgabe, wenn die vorgeschlagenen implements-Fälle spezifiziert und abgedeckt sind, ohne das angegebene extends-Verhalten zu ändern.