Skip to content
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

Add typed return for Object.defineProperties #41424

Open
2 of 5 tasks
clshortfuse opened this issue Nov 6, 2020 · 5 comments
Open
2 of 5 tasks

Add typed return for Object.defineProperties #41424

clshortfuse opened this issue Nov 6, 2020 · 5 comments
Labels
Awaiting More Feedback This means we'd like to hear from more people who would be helped by this feature Suggestion An idea for TypeScript

Comments

@clshortfuse
Copy link

clshortfuse commented Nov 6, 2020

Search Terms

Object.defineProperties typed

Suggestion

const newObject = Object.defineProperties(o, map);

Use Cases

Creating extensions of certain properties while still being able to type-check them

Examples

/** @type {NodeList} */
const nodeListObject = Object.defineProperties(/** @type {Node[]} */ ([]), {
    item: {
      enumerable: false,
      /** @param {number} [index] */
      value: function item(index) { return this[index]; },
    },
  });

Checklist

My suggestion meets these guidelines:

  • 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, etc.)
  • This feature would agree with the rest of TypeScript's Design Goals.

The current type I'm using is the following:

interface ObjectConstructor {
  defineProperties<T1, T2 = PropertyDescriptorMap>(o: T1, properties: T2 & ThisType<T1>): T1 & {
        [K in keyof T2]: (
          T2[K]['get'] extends Function ? ReturnType<T2[K]['get']> :
          T2[K]['set'] extends Function ? Parameters<T2[K]['set']>[0] :
          T2[K]['value'] extends undefined ? any : T2[K]['value']
        )
      };
}

It seems alright but I would love to get some feedback. Currently, I'm targeting against .get() first, then .set(arg0) and finally .value.

See: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Object/defineProperties

@ExE-Boss
Copy link
Contributor

ExE-Boss commented Nov 6, 2020

Yours won’t correctly handle non‑writable properties, whereas mine is much more correct:

interface ObjectConstructor {
	defineProperty<
		T,
		P extends PropertyKey,
		V = P extends keyof T ? T[P] : unknown,
		W = P extends keyof T ? true : false
	>(
		target: T,
		property: P,
		descriptor: TypedPropertyDescriptor<V> & { readonly writable?: W },
	): (T &
		{ readonly [K in P as W extends false ? K : never]: V } &
		{ -readonly [K in P as W extends true ? K : never]: V })
		// Needs https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/40562:
		// & (asserts target is T &
		//	{ readonly [K in P as W extends false ? K : never]: V } &
		//	{ -readonly [K in P as W extends true ? K : never]: V });

	defineProperties<
		T,
		M extends Record<string | symbol, PropertyDescriptor>
	>(
		target: T,
		properties: M & ThisType<T>,
	): ({} extends M ? T : T & {
			readonly [K in keyof M as M[K] extends { readonly writable: false } ? K : (K extends keyof T ? never : K)]:
				M[K] extends Readonly<TypedPropertyDescriptor<infer V>> ? V : any;
		} & {
			-readonly [K in keyof M as M[K] extends { readonly writable: true } ? K : (K extends keyof T ? K : never)]:
				M[K] extends Readonly<TypedPropertyDescriptor<infer V>> ? V : any;
		})
		// Needs https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/40562:
		// & (asserts target is ({} extends M ? T : T & {
		//	readonly [K in keyof M as M[K] extends { readonly writable: false } ? K : (K extends keyof T ? never : K)]:
		//		M[K] extends Readonly<TypedPropertyDescriptor<infer V>> ? V : any;
		// } & {
		//	-readonly [K in keyof M as M[K] extends { readonly writable: true } ? K : (K extends keyof T ? K : never)]:
		//		M[K] extends Readonly<TypedPropertyDescriptor<infer V>> ? V : any;
		// }))
}

@clshortfuse
Copy link
Author

Ah, I didn't see TypedPropertyDescriptor which would make things much easier. Any reason why this isn't part of the typings?

@ExE-Boss
Copy link
Contributor

ExE-Boss commented Nov 7, 2020

@clshortfuse
It’s probably for legacy compatibility.

Which is probably the same reason as to why strictBindCallApply is not the default.

@RyanCavanaugh RyanCavanaugh added Awaiting More Feedback This means we'd like to hear from more people who would be helped by this feature Suggestion An idea for TypeScript labels Nov 11, 2020
@ExE-Boss
Copy link
Contributor

PR #42424 seems to be a start towards addressing this.

@edemaine
Copy link

edemaine commented Jan 26, 2022

@ExE-Boss Your definition seems far more useful. Perhaps it would make sense to turn into a PR? Is #40562 essential?

Adding proper definitions of Object.defineProperties would be one way to approach getters/setters in CoffeeScript, which doesn't currently have built-in support so recommends using defineProperty. Lack of TypeScript support came up in this discussion.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Awaiting More Feedback This means we'd like to hear from more people who would be helped by this feature Suggestion An idea for TypeScript
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants