Implement erasable Enum Annotations#61414
Conversation
… to Enum Literals)
typescript-bot
added
the
For Uncommitted Bug
|
This PR doesn't have any linked issues. Please open an issue that references this PR. From there we can discuss and prioritise. |
|
Looks like you're introducing a change to the public API surface area. If this includes breaking changes, please document them on our wiki's API Breaking Changes page. Also, please make sure @DanielRosenwasser and @RyanCavanaugh are aware of the changes, just as a heads up. |
src/compiler/checker.ts
Outdated
| } | ||
| } | ||
| else if (isEnumDeclaration(node)) { | ||
| else if (isEnumDeclaration(node) || (isVariableDeclaration(node) && node.initializer && isEnumLiteralExpression(node.initializer))) { |
| const nonexist: E1 = E1.NonexistingShorthand; // ok | ||
| const exist: E1 = E1.ExistingShorthand; // ok | ||
| const ival: E1 = E1.Int; // ok | ||
| const sval: E1 = E1.String; // ok |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this implementation support types for individual variants? In other words, would the following work?
const exist: E1.ExistingShorthand = E1.ExistingShorthand; // ok
const ival: E1.Int = E1.Int; // ok
const sval: E1.String = E1.String;
I looked through the PR, but did not see code handling it or tests for this. It seems however to delegate to the existing enum handling in some places so I assume that it should work. I would appreciate a confirmation, thank you.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've made an effort to add a few of these tests (and they seem to be working, although it is a bit loose with accepting a wider number type for a unique numeric enum value. I believe that's normal for TS enums, though), but mostly I was focused on getting the invariant checks working. Thanks for the suggestion.
….ts for individual members as types
but it adds a bunch of casting, which isn't great
|
With 6.0 out as the final release vehicle for this codebase, we're closing all PRs that don't fit the merge criteria for post-6.0 patches. If you think this was a mistake and this PR fits the post-6.0 patch criteria, please post to the 6.0 iteration issue with details (specifically, which PR and which patch criteria it satisfies). Next steps for PRs:
|
4 participants
In order to meet the goal of allowing "erasable" syntax only, which can be trivially converted to JS by removing type annotations, as described in #60790, including input from the TypeScript team to prefer the annotation to the "as enum" syntax.
This permits emitting code by simply erasing the Type Annotation. The TypeChecker sees references to the variable as a reference to an Enum-like type.
There are currently a few remaining obvious issues, for instance comments surrounding EnumMembers in the source are omitted from the emitted JS.
CC @nicolo-ribaudo @romulocintra