microsoft / microsoft/TypeScript
Narrow object property indexed by another object's property of unique symbol type (like `Symbol.iterator`)
Dieses Issue hat noch niemand übernommen.
- Vorherrschende Sprache
- Go
- Sterne
- 111k
- Forks
- 14.3k
- Ø Merge
- 2 T. 4 Std.
- Gemergte PRs (30 T.)
- 132
Beschreibung
🔍 Search Terms
type guard, narrowing, control flow analysis, property, index, known type, symbol type, bracket notation, unique symbol, known symbol, Symbol.iterator, #10530
✅ 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
This is yet another version of #10530 that doesn't seem to be covered by cases in #56389 or #61176. It might even be covered by #62247 and/or #62314 but I'm not sure. TypeScript already narrows by bracket notation when the key is a unique symbol variable:
declare const s: unique symbol;
declare const x: {}
if ((s in x) && (typeof x[s] === "string")) { x[s].toUpperCase(); }; // okay
but this no longer works if the key is a unique symbol property of another object:
declare const obj: { readonly s: unique symbol }
declare const x: {}
if ((obj.s in x) && (typeof x[obj.s] === "string")) { x[obj.s].toUpperCase(); } // error
The suggestion here is to make the latter work like the former.
📃 Motivating Example
See https://stackoverflow.com/questions/79877994/why-does-my-test-for-an-iterableiterator-fail
Consider
function f(x: object) {
if ((Symbol.iterator in x) && (typeof x[Symbol.iterator] === "function")) {
x[Symbol.iterator].length; // error
//~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ <-- Object is of type 'unknown'.(2571)
}
}
This just looks like a somewhat unfortunate gap in type guarding, where TS knows Symbol.iterator is a unique symbol but won't actually do the narrowing unless you put that unique symbol in its own variable directly:
function f(x: object) {
const symbolIterator: typeof Symbol.iterator = Symbol.iterator;
if ((symbolIterator in x) && (typeof x[symbolIterator] === "function")) {
x[symbolIterator].length; // okay
}
}
💻 Use Cases
- What do you want to use this for? To allow people to type guard on
Symbol.XXXproperties - What shortcomings exist with current approaches? People apparently don't like to copy things to new variables just for narrowing.
- What workarounds are you using in the meantime? Copy things to new variables. The obvious approach is the old standby, where we replace
if (f(obj[k])) g(obj[k])withconst objK = obj[k]; if (f(objK)) g(objK)
Beitragsleitfaden
Erste Schritte
- Lies das ganze Issue und danach den Beitragsleitfaden des Projekts.
- Schreib ins Issue, dass du es übernimmst — das erspart doppelte Arbeit.
- Forke das Repository und arbeite in einem Branch.
- Öffne einen Pull Request, der die Issue-Nummer nennt.
Rechercherichtung
Beginne mit der Lektüre von TypeScripts Kontrollflussanalyse und der Behandlung von Typwächtern für die Klammernotation und vergleiche dabei das funktionierende Beispiel mit einer unique-symbol-Variable mit den fehlschlagenden Fällen obj.s und Symbol.iterator. Sieh dir die zugehörigen Issues #10530, #56389, #61176, #62247 und #62314 an und verwende anschließend das bereitgestellte Playground-Beispiel, um zu überprüfen, dass der Eigenschaftszugriff nach Abschluss der Änderung konsistent eingegrenzt wird.
Vom Indexierungsmodell aus dem Issue-Text verfasst.
Bewertung
- Tech-Stack
- typescript
- Bereich
- compilers
- Issue-Typ
- Feature
- Schwierigkeit
- 5/5
- Geschätzter Aufwand
- Über eine Woche
- Aktivitätsstatus
- Veraltet
- Klarheit
- Größtenteils klar
- Anfängerfreundlichkeit
- 35/100