Correct handling of union types in expressions #1765
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ahejlsberg
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 21, 2015
Correct handling of union types in expressions
Closed
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #1715 (and others like it).
This PR corrects our handling of union types for certain expression operators. Specifically, where operators support operands of certain kinds of types we now also support unions of those kinds of types. For example, in an index access
a[x]we now allowxto be a union type such asstring | numberorEnum1 | Enum2, and in an arithmetic operation such asx * ywe allow the operands to be unions composed of enum types.