microsoft / microsoft/TypeScript

Strict index signatures option

Abierto
#56,378 3 comentarios 0 reacciones 0 asignados Ver en GitHub

Nadie ha tomado este issue todavía.

Awaiting More Feedback Suggestion
Lenguaje dominante
Go
Estrellas
111k
Forks
14.4k
Merge medio
1 d 19 h
PR fusionados (30 d)
117

Descripción

🔍 Search Terms

strict index signatures

✅ Viability Checklist
⭐ Suggestion

Basically, I'm wondering if there's any interest to revisit #7029 and provide an option for an alternative balance.

To recap, the status quo is that object literal types (like {a: number}) are (intentionally unsoundly) considered assignable to index signature types (like {[k: string]: number}) as long as each property is assignable; but the exact same interface type is not:

function httpService(path: string, headers: { [h: string]: string }) { }

// A) direct object literal
httpService("/", { "Content-Type": "application/json" }) // ✅ ok

// B) object literal types
const headers = { "Content-Type": "application/json" }
httpService("/", headers) // ✅ ok

type HeadersTypeLiteral = { "Content-Type": string }
const headers2: HeadersTypeLiteral = headers
httpService("/", headers2) // ✅ ok

// C) interface type
interface HeadersInterface { "Content-Type": string }
const headers3: HeadersInterface = headers
httpService("/", headers3) // ❌ Type Error: Index signature missing...

This is totally sound for a direct object literal, of course, since we know it has no other properties (assuming no one messed with Object.prototype); but object literal types can come from anywhere, so that's pretty unsound. It's also a little surprising—I don't immediately know off the top of my head other cases where interface types vs interface literal types make such a big difference.

I understand this was an FAQ back in the day, but is there any way we could have the option of extra strictness, where direct object literals (A) above) are still assignable (they're already treated differently for excess property checks), but object literal types (B)) would behave more like interface types (C))?

Even more ideal of course would be if we distinguished between object literal types that come directly from object literal expressions in the same scope, vs inferred object literal types like cause the problem in the motivating example below. (If we did distinguish them, we could even extend excess property checks to the same-scope object literals!)

📃 Motivating Example

Consider this example, purely functional, seemingly correct types everywhere, and no typecasts (from this tweet):

function validateUsername(input: { username: string }) {
  console.assert(input.username.length < 30)
  return input
}

function printRecord(record: Record<string, string>) {
  for (const key in record) {
    const value = record[key]
    console.log(`${key}: ${value.trim().toLowerCase()}`) // 💥
  }
}

const account = {
  username: 'person',
  email: 'person@example.com',
  isAdmin: false,
}

const validated = validateUsername(account)
printRecord(validated)
💻 Use Cases
  1. What do you want to use this for?
    I want to trust TypeScript's inference in common cases

  2. What shortcomings exist with current approaches?
    Unsoundness without any red-flag features like typecasts, mutation, aliasing

  3. What workarounds are you using in the meantime?
    Manually checking for this bug 😕

Guía de contribución

Abrir la guía de contribución

Primeros pasos

  1. Lee el issue completo y luego la guía de contribución del proyecto.
  2. Comenta en el issue que vas a ocuparte — evita que dos personas hagan lo mismo.
  3. Haz un fork del repositorio y trabaja en una rama.
  4. Abre un pull request que haga referencia al número del issue.

Línea de trabajo

Comienza revisando el issue #7029 y reproduciendo el ejemplo motivador con el compilador de TypeScript. No se identifica ningún archivo de implementación ni ninguna ruta de pruebas, así que localiza primero el área del checker y las pruebas relevantes del sistema de tipos antes de proponer la semántica exacta de la opción. Se considera terminado cuando el comportamiento para literales directos, tipos de objeto inferidos e interfaces está especificado y cubierto por pruebas.

Escrito por el modelo de indexación a partir del texto del issue.

Evaluación

Stack tecnológico
typescript
Área
compilers
Tipo de issue
Nueva funcionalidad
Dificultad
5/5
Tiempo estimado
Más de una semana
Estado de actividad
Estancado
Claridad
Bastante claro
Aptitud para principiantes
28/100

Recibe los nuevos issues en tu correo

Un resumen breve de issues de GitHub para principiantes.