Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
  • 21:30

    weswigham on master

    Do not allow freshness to move … (compare)

  • 21:30
    weswigham closed #35048
  • 21:30
    weswigham closed #34997
  • 21:25
    RyanCavanaugh demilestoned #31315
  • 21:25
    RyanCavanaugh unassigned #31315
  • 21:25
    RyanCavanaugh labeled #31315
  • 21:25
    RyanCavanaugh labeled #31315
  • 21:25
    RyanCavanaugh unlabeled #31315
  • 21:12
    typescript-bot synchronize #35053
  • 21:07

    sandersn on release-3.7

    strip QuestionToken from Method… (compare)

  • 21:02
    DanielRosenwasser opened #35066
  • 21:00

    sandersn on release-3.7

    Fix import type resolution in j… (compare)

  • 20:57
    jack-williams opened #35065
  • 20:45
    sandersn synchronize #15575
  • 20:45
    sandersn synchronize #28460
  • 20:45
    sandersn synchronize #31641
  • 20:44

    sandersn on fix-import-type-resolution-in-jsdoc

    (compare)

  • 20:44

    sandersn on master

    Fix import type resolution in j… (compare)

  • 20:44
    sandersn closed #35057
  • 20:44
    sandersn closed #34926
AnyhowStep
@AnyhowStep
But ? = ? (assignment) is not allowed
@jack-williams just gave another example of that behavior but it's an actual current behaviour
Not exactly the same
But similar enough that it made me think of that
AnyhowStep
@AnyhowStep
In that issue, (arg : never) => T is assignable to (...args : any) => any but not really. It behaves differently depending on whether it's used to constrain a type parameter, or used in a conditional type
Tõnis Ostrat
@tonisostrat
@VulcanRav, it doesn't, yes, but that technically wasn't your requirement either. if you actually need to access a then use any
AnyhowStep
@AnyhowStep
@orta Gitter really needs a better looking logo
Orta
@orta
Yeah, not much I can do there - gitter got bought now, so it’s kinda on the way out I bet
AnyhowStep
@AnyhowStep
I literally had trouble locating it even though there are only 6 icons!
I had to go Ctrl+F > "Gitter"
Orta
@orta
Hah, yep, them memorable 4 lines
webstrand
@webstrand
Did Gitter get sold again? Or does GitLab still own it?
Orta
@orta
nah, still gitlab
Bruce Pascoe
@fatcerberus
@AnyhowStep I always wondered whether (...args: any) => any was checked structurally or not. Good to have some confirmation one way or the other
Although shouldn’t it be ...args: any[] since the rest param always has to be an array
AnyhowStep
@AnyhowStep
Should be ...args : never >;(
Probably something to do with any being assignable to any[] and the other way around. So it doesn't matter
Less concise than any[], though
Bruce Pascoe
@fatcerberus
...args: never - were you trying to make a top type for functions?
AnyhowStep
@AnyhowStep
Yeap
I added that as a comment at the very bottom
ReturnType<> should be accepting a top type for functions, anyway
Bruce Pascoe
@fatcerberus
I had that issue a while ago. ...args: never[] is no good since you can still call it with no args
Never found a good solution :(
Bruce Pascoe
@fatcerberus
If it’s generic though, what about F extends Function?
AnyhowStep
@AnyhowStep
No good, can't use the infer R syntax if you're using extends Function
Also, my concrete F will still end up having never in the param and will break ReturnType<> =x
Even if I'm using Function as the top type for functions
Keith Layne
@keithlayne
IIRC all function has is a name member.
raghanag
@raghanag
hi all, if the typescript class constructor has too many lines, are we going to stub all of it when we are writing unit tests
AnyhowStep
@AnyhowStep
What does that question even mean
Bruce Pascoe
@fatcerberus
@keithlayne Function doesn’t guarantee that it’s callable?
Because that’s kind of sucky if it doesn’t
Keith Layne
@keithlayne
I must have seen an augmentation instead of the actual definition, my bad
Gareth Jones
@G-Rath
ok want to see something interesting?
interface Mx {
  v: string;
}

const promiseTuple = async <T1, T2>(t1: T1, t2: Promise<T2>): Promise<[T1, T2]> =>
  [t1, await t2];

const doThings = async (): Promise<Array<[string, Mx[]]>> => Promise.all([
  promiseTuple('hello', Promise.resolve([{ v: 'sunshine' }])),
  promiseTuple('world', await [{ v: 'peace' }])
]);

doThings().then(r => r.forEach(console.log));
pretty sure that's a bug :grimacing:
AnyhowStep
@AnyhowStep
I'm pretty sure it's not
Gareth Jones
@G-Rath
whys that?
they have the same output
AnyhowStep
@AnyhowStep
(await x) does not give you an expression of type Promise<typeof x>, I'm sure
It's just syntactic sugar
Gareth Jones
@G-Rath
Yeah, that's what I'm questioning
why doesn't it give you an expression of that type? b/c as you say, it's syntactic sugar, so it does give that expression in Node (iirc)
AnyhowStep
@AnyhowStep
If it did return a promise, this would work,
function returnPromise () : Promise<number> {
  return (await 1);
}
Gareth Jones
@G-Rath
which it does
once you add the missing async keyword
AnyhowStep
@AnyhowStep
image.png
Exactly. The async part is the problem here
Gareth Jones
@G-Rath
oh ffs