microsoft / microsoft/TypeScript
Allow iterating through enum variants with for of
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Go
- Stars
- 111k
- Forks
- 14.3k
- Avg merge
- 2d 4h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 132
Description
Suggestion
🔍 Search Terms
enum, iterate, variants
✅ Viability 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, new syntax sugar for JS, etc.)
- This feature would agree with the rest of TypeScript's Design Goals.
Note that "is this a runtime feature?" doesn't really apply in this case since enums are already a runtime feature (maybe the only one?). This suggestion just modifies the compilation output slightly.
⭐ Suggestion
The Typescript code for an enum...
enum Colour {
Red,
Green,
Blue,
}
...generates Javascript like this:
var Colour;
(function (Colour) {
Colour[Colour["Red"] = 0] = "Red";
Colour[Colour["Green"] = 1] = "Green";
Colour[Colour["Blue"] = 2] = "Blue";
})(Colour || (Colour = {}));
Unfortunately there's no nice way to iterate over the enum values. The prevailing suggestion on these two very highly upvoted StackOverflow questions is to use for in and then filter out the reverse mapping entries using typeof. That sucks:
- It's very hacky. Probably really buggy.
- The types are wrong - you get
stringornumberinstead ofColour. - It can't handle duplicated enum variants, e.g.
enum { Zero = 0, None = 0, ...}, although I'm not 100% sure how duplicates should be handled anyway.
I propose that the above enum code should compile to something like this:
var Colour;
(function (Colour) {
Colour[Colour["Red"] = 0] = "Red";
Colour[Colour["Green"] = 1] = "Green";
Colour[Colour["Blue"] = 2] = "Blue";
Colour[Symbol.iterator] = function* () {
yield 0;
yield 1;
yield 2;
};
})(Colour || (Colour = {}));
This would allow you to write:
function paintColour(c: Colour) {...}
for (const c of Colour) {
paintColour(c);
}
📃 Motivating Example / Use Cases
Probably the most common use is generating UI from enums (e.g. a colour drop-down), but this is very general purpose. The StackOverflow questions linked above demonstrate how much people want this. We've come across this twice already in our code - once for UI and once for collecting data per enum variant, e.g.:
enum Category {
Code,
Data,
Constant,
Variable,
Temporary,
... lots more ...
}
const totals: Map<Category, number> = new Map();
// Add a 0 entry for all entries.
for (const cat of Category) {
totals.set(cat, 0);
}
for (const variable of ...) {
totals.set(totals.get(variable.category) + variable.size);
}
Note there is a related but slightly different bug here: #39627 but it's more about how for in does unexpected things than about making for of work. I don't think it really matters since you should never ever use for in anyway.
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
The issue does not name implementation files or tests. Start by locating the compiler's enum emission and for-of handling, then review how generated iteration should behave for numeric, string, and duplicate enum values. Done means an agreed design and corresponding compiler tests covering the proposed output and type checking.
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
- 25/100