microsoft / microsoft/TypeScript

Extend the "forgot an await" check from 4.3 to do limited AST analysis to cover more cases

Aperta
#44,152 1 commento 1 reazione 0 assegnatari Vedi su GitHub

Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.

Experience Enhancement Suggestion
Lingua principale
Go
Stelle
111k
Fork
14.3k
Merge medio
2g 4h
PR unite (30g)
132

Descrizione

Suggestion

🔍 Search Terms

Promise await async "Did you forget to use 'await'?"

✅ 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.

⭐ Suggestion

The new always-truthy promise checks are amazing!
They're very much like @typescript-eslint's no-misused-promises.

As I was investigating https://github.com/typescript-eslint/typescript-eslint/issues/3403, one thing I noticed was that it looks like TypeScript does not do any AST interrogation for this feature - it just inspects the type of the expression.

It'd be great if we could extend this feature to do some AST traversal for common cases (logical expressions and ternaries) so that it can catch more errors.

To clarify what I'm asking for:

  1. If an IfStatement's .expression is a BinaryExpression and the .operator is one of BarBarToken, AmpersandAmpersandToken, or QuestionQuestionToken, then TypeScript should recursively check the .left and .right of the node.
  2. if an IfStatement's .expression is a ConditionalExpression, then TypeScript should recursively check the .whenTrue and .whenFalse of the node.

📃 Motivating Example

declare async function isValid(): Promise<boolean>;
declare const user: {isActive: boolean} | undefined;

// As of TS4.3
if (isValid()) {
//  ^^^^^^^^^
// This condition will always return true since this 'Promise<boolean>' appears to always be defined. (2801)
}
// with this proposal, the following would be an error as well:

if (user?.isActive && isValid()) {
//                    ^^^^^^^^^
}

if (user?.isActive || isValid()) {
//                    ^^^^^^^^^
}

if (user?.isActive ?? isValid()) {
//                    ^^^^^^^^^
}
if (user?.isActive ? isValid() : false) {
//                   ^^^^^^^^^
}
if (user?.isActive ? false : isValid()) {
//                           ^^^^^^^^^
}
if (
  user?.isActive
  ? someOtherCondition
  ? isValid()
//  ^^^^^^^^^
  : false
  : isValid()
//  ^^^^^^^^^
) {
}

💻 Use Cases

The current approach is a step in the right direction, but it could cover even more cases!
Workaround is to use @typescript-eslint/no-misused-promises which does these in-depth checks.

Guida per i contributori

Apri la guida per i contributori

Come iniziare

  1. Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
  2. Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
  3. Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
  4. Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.

Direzione di ricerca

Inizia tracciando il controllo esistente di Promise always-truthy di TypeScript 4.3 e la diagnostica 2801 per le espressioni IfStatement. Confronta la gestione dei nodi BinaryExpression e ConditionalExpression con gli esempi logici e ternari nell’issue. Il lavoro è completato quando i casi Promise mostrati producono le diagnostiche previste senza modificare l’output a runtime.

Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.

Valutazione

Stack tecnologico
typescript
Ambito
compilers
Tipo di issue
Funzionalità
Difficoltà
4/5
Tempo stimato
3-5 giorni
Stato di attività
Ferma
Chiarezza
Abbastanza chiara
Idoneità per principianti
45/100

Ricevi le nuove issue nella tua casella

Un breve riepilogo di issue GitHub adatte ai principianti.