microsoft / microsoft/TypeScript

Unpredictable behavior when trying to infer a generic type from a union function parameter

Offen
#59,046 3 Kommentare 1 Reaktion 0 zugewiesene Personen Auf GitHub ansehen

Dieses Issue hat noch niemand übernommen.

Bug Domain: check: Type Inference Help Wanted
Vorherrschende Sprache
Go
Sterne
111k
Forks
14.4k
Ø Merge
1 T. 19 Std.
Gemergte PRs (30 T.)
117

Beschreibung

🔎 Search Terms

"parameter generic inference", "union order", "ts2345", "union generic parameter"

🕗 Version & Regression Information
  • This is the behavior in every version I tried, and I reviewed the FAQ for entries about unions and generics though I went through it all in general
⏯ Playground Link

https://www.typescriptlang.org/play/?#code/C4TwDgpgBAygrgYwRAzimwCGw4qgXigCYAGEqAH2JIEYBuAKFEigEkA7AN0wBsBLACYZsuAlAAsZShNrTJROSQDMi8YybhoAWRAAlVGAD27FBAA8AFQA0sKBAAewCOwF54SVOiw48VDt34hb1wAPjEAbwYoKBRglAAuWEZowwBrRJg7R2dXWERkNGEfKAB+KGAAJzhoDKynFzx-XkEi0TKAM15TKESAI0NDHghMdmSoACsUYwAKAEpEgAUKwwBbPlNLEMYAX3UHIwrgKARjWKgKg1OIAAkRgSGKsUwUEHYEKEsrEOmo88uTCDxX7RKg6fQoIwAz55DyFOIhYHSMH-DbhOwVZYVLSeTAAc0BMUqfHYuKg2xsTUCrRQCNmBDCkWifHaUGmAEILhCrgA6NJ0xnRY6nI5oiAYwxYnH4slPADumD4R05kNM3MmM1mY2iwAAFstZVB2BADQBRcUVaZizHYtB4iCa37bX4XHAVdh-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

💻 Code
type SuccessStatus = 200 | 201;
type InvalidStatus = 400 | 401 | 402 | 403 | 404;

type MyResponse<T, S extends SuccessStatus | InvalidStatus> = {
  status: S;
  ok: S extends SuccessStatus ? true : S extends InvalidStatus ? false : boolean;
  json(): Promise<T>;
};

export const responseHandler = async <T,>(
  response:
    | MyResponse<T, SuccessStatus>
    | MyResponse<{ errorMessage: string }, InvalidStatus>
) => {
  if (!response.ok) {
    const { errorMessage } = await response.json();
    throw new Error(errorMessage);
  }
  return response.json();
};

// `{id: string }` here can be anything, but `{ errorMessage: string }` 
// will always be present, just not necessarily with `404`, might be any InvalidStatus
type PossibleTypesA =
  | MyResponse<{ id: string }, 200>
  | MyResponse<{ errorMessage: string }, 404>;

type PossibleTypesB =
  | MyResponse<{ errorMessage: string }, 404>
  | MyResponse<{ id: string }, 200>;

type ValidResponse = MyResponse<{ id: string }, 200>;
type ErrorResponse = MyResponse<{ errorMessage: string }, 404>;
type PossibleTypesC = ErrorResponse | ValidResponse;

const dataA = await responseHandler({} as PossibleTypesA);
                                    // ^ works as expected
const dataB = await responseHandler({} as PossibleTypesB);
                                    // ^ wtf?
const dataC = await responseHandler({} as PossibleTypesC);
                                    // ^ now it works as expected... but why?
🙁 Actual behavior

responseHandler in the snippet above throws a ts2345 error when a union type with a swapped order is passed as an argument. Until now I thought a union type a | b is equivalent to b | a but this doesn't seem to be the case. Curiously, this is no longer an issue if the types that are part of the union are aliased, as can be seen in example C (dataC and PossibleTypesC).

🙂 Expected behavior

dataB should not throw an error.

Additional information about the issue

There is an even crazier example and perhaps it's a better proof that this is a bug.

type SomeType = { id: string };

type PossibleTypesA =
  | MyResponse<{ id: string }, 200>
  | MyResponse<{ errorMessage: string }, 404>;

type PossibleTypesB =
  | MyResponse<{ errorMessage: string }, 404>
  | MyResponse<SomeType, 200>;

const dataA = await responseHandler({} as PossibleTypesA);
                                    // ^ works as expected
const dataB = await responseHandler({} as PossibleTypesB);
                                    // ^ does not work but that's why I'm reporting it

Playground Link

type SomeType = { id: string };

type PossibleTypesA =
  | MyResponse<SomeType, 200>
  | MyResponse<{ errorMessage: string }, 404>;

type PossibleTypesB =
  | MyResponse<{ errorMessage: string }, 404>
  | MyResponse<SomeType, 200>;

const dataA = await responseHandler({} as PossibleTypesA);
                                    // ^ works as expected
const dataB = await responseHandler({} as PossibleTypesB);
                                    // ^ it works now???

Playground Link

This is pure insanity to me as the only thing I changed between these two examples is whether PossibleTypesA uses SomeType or not. It should not in any circumstance affect dataB, so I'm extremely confused what is happening here.

Beitragsleitfaden

Beitragsleitfaden öffnen

Erste Schritte

  1. Lies das ganze Issue und danach den Beitragsleitfaden des Projekts.
  2. Schreib ins Issue, dass du es übernimmst — das erspart doppelte Arbeit.
  3. Forke das Repository und arbeite in einem Branch.
  4. Öffne einen Pull Request, der die Issue-Nummer nennt.

Rechercherichtung

Beginne mit den verlinkten TypeScript Playground-Reproduktionen und vergleiche die Aufrufe von responseHandler für PossibleTypesA, PossibleTypesB und PossibleTypesC. Untersuche die generische Inferenz für Unions, deren Mitglieder in unterschiedlicher Reihenfolge geschrieben sind oder Aliase verwenden. Als erledigt gilt die Aufgabe, wenn äquivalente Union-Reihenfolgen keine inkonsistenten ts2345-Fehler mehr erzeugen und die demonstrierten Beispiele weiterhin korrekt inferiert werden.

Vom Indexierungsmodell aus dem Issue-Text verfasst.

Bewertung

Tech-Stack
typescript
Bereich
compilers
Issue-Typ
Bug
Schwierigkeit
4/5
Geschätzter Aufwand
3-5 Tage
Aktivitätsstatus
Veraltet
Klarheit
Größtenteils klar
Anfängerfreundlichkeit
28/100

Neue Issues direkt in Ihr Postfach

Eine kurze Übersicht über anfängerfreundliche GitHub-Issues.