`abstract class` should be usable in expressions

🔍 Search Terms

abstract, class, expression

✅ Viability Checklist

• 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 isn't a request to add a new utility type: https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/wiki/No-New-Utility-Types
• This feature would agree with the rest of our Design Goals: https://github.com/Microsoft/TypeScript/wiki/TypeScript-Design-Goals

⭐ Suggestion

function myMixin(Base: typeof Object) {
  return abstract class Mixed extends Base {};
}

📃 Motivating Example

Preferable to:

function myMixin(Base: typeof Object) {
  abstract class Mixed extends Base {}
  return Mixed;
}

💻 Use Cases

1. What do you want to use this for?
   Same uses as without
2. What shortcomings exist with current approaches?
   Slight additional verbosity
3. What workarounds are you using in the meantime?
   Slight additional verbosity

Start with the suggested mixin example and the motivating comparison to define the accepted expression form and its type-checking behavior. Trace the compiler entry points for class declarations and expressions, then verify that the example type-checks and produces no runtime-output change.