Type instantiation for type level generic function

🔍 Search Terms

type instantiation
type level generic function
generic return type

Related: https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/40542, https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/61133 and maybe https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/52035?

Edit: Just found https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/55435 and https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/40179

✅ 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

#47607 added support for instantiation expressions, but those do not apply at the type level. I understand it'd be ambiguous in some cases (https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/pull/47607#issuecomment-1058192563), but in some cases there really isn't a reasonable workaround.

📃 Motivating Example

I actually have a very similar case to the example provided in https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/40542

const provideBox = () => {
    const box = <T>(value: T) => ({value});
    return box;
};

type BoxMaker = ReturnType<typeof provideBox>
// type BoxMaker = <T>(value: T) => { value: T; }

type Box1<T> = ReturnType<BoxMaker<T>>;
// Type 'BoxMaker' is not generic.(2315)

const box = undefined as unknown as BoxMaker;

type Box2<T> = ReturnType<typeof box<T>>;
//type Box2<T> = { value: T; }

{
  "compilerOptions": {
    "strict": true,
    "noImplicitAny": true,
    "strictNullChecks": true,
    "strictFunctionTypes": true,
    "strictPropertyInitialization": true,
    "strictBindCallApply": true,
    "noImplicitThis": true,
    "noImplicitReturns": true,
    "alwaysStrict": true,
    "esModuleInterop": true,
    "declaration": true,
    "target": "ES2017",
    "module": "ESNext",
    "moduleResolution": "node"
  }
}

Playground Link: Provided

💻 Use Cases

1. What do you want to use this for?

In our case we have a more complex provideBox that accept arguments. We also need to rely on type inference for the generic type of the box function and its return value;

3. What shortcomings exist with current approaches?

I cannot extract and export a generic type for a return value of a generic function if I don't have direct reference to the function.

5. What workarounds are you using in the meantime?

The only workaround I found is to use a dummy runtime value to apply the type, and use and instantiation expression on that dummy value (see Box2 above)

Inizia riproducendo l’esempio motivante nel link Playground fornito, quindi leggi le issue correlate e PR #47607 per comprendere il comportamento esistente delle espressioni di istanziazione e le ambiguità segnalate. Il lavoro è completato quando una forma a livello di tipo può estrarre il tipo restituito generico senza un valore runtime fittizio, producendo il risultato Box2 previsto e preservando il comportamento esistente.