microsoft / microsoft/TypeScript
Unable to invoke an arrow function with an assertion predicate
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Go
- Stars
- 111k
- Forks
- 14.3k
- Avg merge
- 1d 19h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 117
Description
🔎 Search Terms
arrow function, assertion, predicate, 2775
🕗 Version & Regression Information
- This is the behavior in every version I tried
⏯ Playground Link
💻 Code
type A = { x: number };
type B = A & { y: number };
const foo = (a: A): asserts a is B => {
if ((a as B).y !== 0) throw TypeError();
return undefined;
};
export const main = () => {
const a: A = { x: 1 };
// TypeError: Assertions require every name in the call target to be declared with an explicit type annotation.(2775)
foo(a);
};
🙁 Actual behavior
It looks like they goal of https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/pull/45952 was for assertion predicates to work for arrow functions, but this only handles the JSDoc case, which I assume TS treats as equivalent to directly annotating the entire function at once, i.e.:
const foo: (a: A) => asserts a is B = (a) => {};
For functions with more named parameters, this annotation style quickly becomes unwieldy. There is no semantic difference between this annotation or the style from the repro:
const foo = (a: A): asserts a is B => {};
Is it possible to identify a top-level arrow function like this assigned to a const variable with annotated parameters and return as having an "explicit type," which was defined as the standard for being able to use an assertion predicate like this in @ahejlsberg's initial PR (https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/pull/32695)?
This style is increasingly common, and I think many developers (my self included) simply write a function like this, see it doesn't work, then choose not to use the feature, not knowing something like moving the annotation to the variable itself could have an effect.
🙂 Expected behavior
(see above)
Additional information about the issue
No response
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 with the TypeScript Playground repro and compare its arrow-function assertion predicate handling with the behavior described in PRs #45952 and #32695. Trace the explicit-type requirement for the const-bound arrow function, then validate the expected behavior with a focused compiler test covering the provided example.
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