-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.6k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Introduce the "comparable" relation #5517
Changes from 16 commits
002bb6f
7426aca
43f158d
1edb007
9a5e3e3
42b3ce4
929808e
262352e
bdb1db5
441dd78
841789d
5cb95d4
ab7c4e5
e224083
fa6e181
80a50aa
42c49ce
6c8c122
f6eacb9
a37b731
e0385a4
0a706c4
a3faca5
3cc64cb
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -211,6 +211,7 @@ namespace ts { | |
|
||
let subtypeRelation: Map<RelationComparisonResult> = {}; | ||
let assignableRelation: Map<RelationComparisonResult> = {}; | ||
let comparableRelation: Map<RelationComparisonResult> = {}; | ||
let identityRelation: Map<RelationComparisonResult> = {}; | ||
|
||
// This is for caching the result of getSymbolDisplayBuilder. Do not access directly. | ||
|
@@ -4738,6 +4739,14 @@ namespace ts { | |
return checkTypeAssignableTo(source, target, /*errorNode*/ undefined); | ||
} | ||
|
||
/** | ||
* This is *not* a bi-directional relationship. | ||
* If one needs to check both directions for comparability, use a second call to this function or 'checkTypeComparableTo'. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. All uses do need to check both directions, so probably you should have a version that does that. You might not even need the uni-directional ones except for consistency with the other relations. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. See this comment |
||
*/ | ||
function isTypeComparableTo(source: Type, target: Type): boolean { | ||
return checkTypeComparableTo(source, target, /*errorNode*/ undefined); | ||
} | ||
|
||
function checkTypeSubtypeOf(source: Type, target: Type, errorNode: Node, headMessage?: DiagnosticMessage, containingMessageChain?: DiagnosticMessageChain): boolean { | ||
return checkTypeRelatedTo(source, target, subtypeRelation, errorNode, headMessage, containingMessageChain); | ||
} | ||
|
@@ -4746,6 +4755,14 @@ namespace ts { | |
return checkTypeRelatedTo(source, target, assignableRelation, errorNode, headMessage, containingMessageChain); | ||
} | ||
|
||
/** | ||
* This is *not* a bi-directional relationship. | ||
* If one needs to check both directions for comparability, use a second call to this function or 'isTypeComparableTo'. | ||
*/ | ||
function checkTypeComparableTo(source: Type, target: Type, errorNode: Node, headMessage?: DiagnosticMessage, containingMessageChain?: DiagnosticMessageChain): boolean { | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. nit: This function is hard to read on a portrait (1200 px) monitor with github's generous margins cutting it down to about 700 px. Might not be worth fixing. |
||
return checkTypeRelatedTo(source, target, comparableRelation, errorNode, headMessage, containingMessageChain); | ||
} | ||
|
||
function isSignatureAssignableTo(source: Signature, target: Signature): boolean { | ||
let sourceType = getOrCreateTypeFromSignature(source); | ||
let targetType = getOrCreateTypeFromSignature(target); | ||
|
@@ -4756,7 +4773,7 @@ namespace ts { | |
* Checks if 'source' is related to 'target' (e.g.: is a assignable to). | ||
* @param source The left-hand-side of the relation. | ||
* @param target The right-hand-side of the relation. | ||
* @param relation The relation considered. One of 'identityRelation', 'assignableRelation', or 'subTypeRelation'. | ||
* @param relation The relation considered. One of 'identityRelation', 'assignableRelation', 'subTypeRelation', or 'comparableRelation'. | ||
* Used as both to determine which checks are performed and as a cache of previously computed results. | ||
* @param errorNode The suggested node upon which all errors will be reported, if defined. This may or may not be the actual node used. | ||
* @param headMessage If the error chain should be prepended by a head message, then headMessage will be used. | ||
|
@@ -4781,6 +4798,7 @@ namespace ts { | |
|
||
Debug.assert(relation !== identityRelation || !errorNode, "no error reporting in identity checking"); | ||
|
||
const isAssignableOrComparableRelation = relation === assignableRelation || relation === comparableRelation; | ||
let result = isRelatedTo(source, target, errorNode !== undefined, headMessage); | ||
if (overflow) { | ||
error(errorNode, Diagnostics.Excessive_stack_depth_comparing_types_0_and_1, typeToString(source), typeToString(target)); | ||
|
@@ -4814,7 +4832,14 @@ namespace ts { | |
sourceType = typeToString(source, /*enclosingDeclaration*/ undefined, TypeFormatFlags.UseFullyQualifiedType); | ||
targetType = typeToString(target, /*enclosingDeclaration*/ undefined, TypeFormatFlags.UseFullyQualifiedType); | ||
} | ||
reportError(message || Diagnostics.Type_0_is_not_assignable_to_type_1, sourceType, targetType); | ||
|
||
if (!message) { | ||
message = relation === comparableRelation ? | ||
Diagnostics.Type_0_is_not_comparable_with_type_1 : | ||
Diagnostics.Type_0_is_not_assignable_to_type_1; | ||
} | ||
|
||
reportError(message, sourceType, targetType); | ||
} | ||
|
||
// Compare two types and return | ||
|
@@ -4834,7 +4859,7 @@ namespace ts { | |
if (source === nullType && target !== undefinedType) return Ternary.True; | ||
if (source.flags & TypeFlags.Enum && target === numberType) return Ternary.True; | ||
if (source.flags & TypeFlags.StringLiteral && target === stringType) return Ternary.True; | ||
if (relation === assignableRelation) { | ||
if (isAssignableOrComparableRelation) { | ||
if (isTypeAny(source)) return Ternary.True; | ||
if (source === numberType && target.flags & TypeFlags.Enum) return Ternary.True; | ||
} | ||
|
@@ -4859,12 +4884,21 @@ namespace ts { | |
|
||
// Note that the "each" checks must precede the "some" checks to produce the correct results | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This comment needs to reflect the more complex checks. |
||
if (source.flags & TypeFlags.Union) { | ||
if (result = eachTypeRelatedToType(<UnionType>source, target, reportErrors)) { | ||
if (relation === comparableRelation) { | ||
result = someTypeRelatedToType(source as UnionType, target, reportErrors); | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Please choose one cast syntax and make at least the changed lines use it, preferably something like all the casts in the function. |
||
} | ||
else { | ||
result = eachTypeRelatedToType(<UnionType>source, target, reportErrors); | ||
} | ||
|
||
if (result) { | ||
return result; | ||
} | ||
} | ||
else if (target.flags & TypeFlags.Intersection) { | ||
if (result = typeRelatedToEachType(source, <IntersectionType>target, reportErrors)) { | ||
result = typeRelatedToEachType(source, <IntersectionType>target, reportErrors); | ||
|
||
if (result) { | ||
return result; | ||
} | ||
} | ||
|
@@ -4873,7 +4907,8 @@ namespace ts { | |
// on either side that need to be prioritized. For example, A | B = (A | B) & (C | D) or | ||
// A & B = (A & B) | (C & D). | ||
if (source.flags & TypeFlags.Intersection) { | ||
// If target is a union type the following check will report errors so we suppress them here | ||
// If target is a union type then the check following this one will report errors, | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I don't think this improves on the old wording. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. It does if you have more context. "The following check" implies "the one directly below" |
||
// so we'll suppress any errors we could run into here. | ||
if (result = someTypeRelatedToType(<IntersectionType>source, target, reportErrors && !(target.flags & TypeFlags.Union))) { | ||
return result; | ||
} | ||
|
@@ -4942,8 +4977,8 @@ namespace ts { | |
} | ||
if (source.flags & TypeFlags.Union && target.flags & TypeFlags.Union || | ||
source.flags & TypeFlags.Intersection && target.flags & TypeFlags.Intersection) { | ||
if (result = eachTypeRelatedToSomeType(<UnionOrIntersectionType>source, <UnionOrIntersectionType>target)) { | ||
if (result &= eachTypeRelatedToSomeType(<UnionOrIntersectionType>target, <UnionOrIntersectionType>source)) { | ||
if (result = eachTypeRelatedToSomeType(<UnionOrIntersectionType>source, <UnionOrIntersectionType>target, /*reportErrors*/ false)) { | ||
if (result &= eachTypeRelatedToSomeType(<UnionOrIntersectionType>target, <UnionOrIntersectionType>source, /*reportErrors*/ false)) { | ||
return result; | ||
} | ||
} | ||
|
@@ -4958,7 +4993,7 @@ namespace ts { | |
function isKnownProperty(type: Type, name: string): boolean { | ||
if (type.flags & TypeFlags.ObjectType) { | ||
const resolved = resolveStructuredTypeMembers(type); | ||
if (relation === assignableRelation && (type === globalObjectType || resolved.properties.length === 0) || | ||
if (isAssignableOrComparableRelation && (type === globalObjectType || resolved.properties.length === 0) || | ||
resolved.stringIndexType || resolved.numberIndexType || getPropertyOfType(type, name)) { | ||
return true; | ||
} | ||
|
@@ -4992,11 +5027,11 @@ namespace ts { | |
return false; | ||
} | ||
|
||
function eachTypeRelatedToSomeType(source: UnionOrIntersectionType, target: UnionOrIntersectionType): Ternary { | ||
function eachTypeRelatedToSomeType(source: UnionOrIntersectionType, target: UnionOrIntersectionType, reportErrors: boolean): Ternary { | ||
let result = Ternary.True; | ||
let sourceTypes = source.types; | ||
for (let sourceType of sourceTypes) { | ||
let related = typeRelatedToSomeType(sourceType, target, false); | ||
let related = typeRelatedToSomeType(sourceType, target, reportErrors); | ||
if (!related) { | ||
return Ternary.False; | ||
} | ||
|
@@ -9381,8 +9416,9 @@ namespace ts { | |
let targetType = getTypeFromTypeNode(node.type); | ||
if (produceDiagnostics && targetType !== unknownType) { | ||
let widenedType = getWidenedType(exprType); | ||
if (!(isTypeAssignableTo(targetType, widenedType))) { | ||
checkTypeAssignableTo(exprType, targetType, node, Diagnostics.Neither_type_0_nor_type_1_is_assignable_to_the_other); | ||
|
||
if (!isTypeComparableTo(targetType, widenedType)) { | ||
checkTypeComparableTo(exprType, targetType, node); | ||
} | ||
} | ||
return targetType; | ||
|
@@ -10225,7 +10261,7 @@ namespace ts { | |
case SyntaxKind.ExclamationEqualsToken: | ||
case SyntaxKind.EqualsEqualsEqualsToken: | ||
case SyntaxKind.ExclamationEqualsEqualsToken: | ||
if (!isTypeAssignableTo(leftType, rightType) && !isTypeAssignableTo(rightType, leftType)) { | ||
if (!isTypeComparableTo(leftType, rightType) && !isTypeComparableTo(rightType, leftType)) { | ||
reportOperatorError(); | ||
} | ||
return booleanType; | ||
|
@@ -12689,12 +12725,12 @@ namespace ts { | |
|
||
if (produceDiagnostics && clause.kind === SyntaxKind.CaseClause) { | ||
let caseClause = <CaseClause>clause; | ||
// TypeScript 1.0 spec (April 2014):5.9 | ||
// TypeScript 1.0 spec (April 2014): 5.9 | ||
// In a 'switch' statement, each 'case' expression must be of a type that is assignable to or from the type of the 'switch' expression. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. update 'assignable' to 'comparable' |
||
let caseType = checkExpression(caseClause.expression); | ||
if (!isTypeAssignableTo(expressionType, caseType)) { | ||
// check 'expressionType isAssignableTo caseType' failed, try the reversed check and report errors if it fails | ||
checkTypeAssignableTo(caseType, expressionType, caseClause.expression, /*headMessage*/ undefined); | ||
|
||
if (!isTypeComparableTo(expressionType, caseType)) { | ||
checkTypeComparableTo(caseType, expressionType, caseClause.expression, /*headMessage*/ undefined); | ||
} | ||
} | ||
forEach(clause.statements, checkSourceElement); | ||
|
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -888,6 +888,10 @@ | |
"category": "Error", | ||
"code": 2322 | ||
}, | ||
"Type '{0}' is not comparable with type '{1}'.": { | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I prefer 'comparable to' here. A little research shows that grammarians think they're about equally common, while Google's hideously unreliable hit count shows 4 times more hits for 'comparable to'*. But the function is also named *Google hit counts are the laziest way to do quantitative linguistics. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yeah, I couldn't decide, but I'm okay with either. |
||
"category": "Error", | ||
"code": 2323 | ||
}, | ||
"Property '{0}' is missing in type '{1}'.": { | ||
"category": "Error", | ||
"code": 2324 | ||
|
@@ -996,10 +1000,6 @@ | |
"category": "Error", | ||
"code": 2351 | ||
}, | ||
"Neither type '{0}' nor type '{1}' is assignable to the other.": { | ||
"category": "Error", | ||
"code": 2352 | ||
}, | ||
"Object literal may only specify known properties, and '{0}' does not exist in type '{1}'.": { | ||
"category": "Error", | ||
"code": 2353 | ||
|
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@ | ||
tests/cases/conformance/expressions/asOperator/asOperator2.ts(1,9): error TS2352: Neither type 'number' nor type 'string' is assignable to the other. | ||
tests/cases/conformance/expressions/asOperator/asOperator2.ts(1,9): error TS2323: Type 'number' is not comparable with type 'string'. | ||
|
||
|
||
==== tests/cases/conformance/expressions/asOperator/asOperator2.ts (1 errors) ==== | ||
var x = 23 as string; | ||
~~~~~~~~~~~~ | ||
!!! error TS2352: Neither type 'number' nor type 'string' is assignable to the other. | ||
!!! error TS2323: Type 'number' is not comparable with type 'string'. | ||
|
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,10 +1,10 @@ | ||
tests/cases/conformance/expressions/asOperator/asOperatorContextualType.ts(2,9): error TS2352: Neither type '(v: number) => number' nor type '(x: number) => string' is assignable to the other. | ||
Type 'number' is not assignable to type 'string'. | ||
tests/cases/conformance/expressions/asOperator/asOperatorContextualType.ts(2,9): error TS2323: Type '(v: number) => number' is not comparable with type '(x: number) => string'. | ||
Type 'number' is not comparable with type 'string'. | ||
|
||
|
||
==== tests/cases/conformance/expressions/asOperator/asOperatorContextualType.ts (1 errors) ==== | ||
// should error | ||
var x = (v => v) as (x: number) => string; | ||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | ||
!!! error TS2352: Neither type '(v: number) => number' nor type '(x: number) => string' is assignable to the other. | ||
!!! error TS2352: Type 'number' is not assignable to type 'string'. | ||
!!! error TS2323: Type '(v: number) => number' is not comparable with type '(x: number) => string'. | ||
!!! error TS2323: Type 'number' is not comparable with type 'string'. |
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,11 +1,11 @@ | ||
tests/cases/conformance/expressions/asOperator/asOperatorNames.ts(2,9): error TS2352: Neither type 'number' nor type 'string' is assignable to the other. | ||
tests/cases/conformance/expressions/asOperator/asOperatorNames.ts(2,9): error TS2323: Type 'number' is not comparable with type 'string'. | ||
|
||
|
||
==== tests/cases/conformance/expressions/asOperator/asOperatorNames.ts (1 errors) ==== | ||
var a = 20; | ||
var b = a as string; | ||
~~~~~~~~~~~ | ||
!!! error TS2352: Neither type 'number' nor type 'string' is assignable to the other. | ||
!!! error TS2323: Type 'number' is not comparable with type 'string'. | ||
var as = "hello"; | ||
var as1 = as as string; | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is this true of
isTypeAssignableTo
too? Its former usage in this diff indicates 'yes'.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It is true of
isTypeAssignableTo
butisTypeAssignableTo
has a clear direction; on the other hand,isTypeComparableTo
is vague enough that it warrants a comment. One would think thatA
being comparable toB
implies thatB
is comarable toA
, but that's not quite the case.I could have made
isTypeComparableTo
a bidirectional relation, but I decided not to based on the way in which we use the relation in type assertions. Specifically, with type assertions, we check whether the expression type is comparable to the asserted type and that the asserted type is comparable to the widened type of the expression.Actually, I'm not sure if there is any reason we don't check against the widened type for both. I'll experiment with it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As discussed offline, I think that's a bug. I will change that in a later PR