Skip to content

JS generic inference change after upgrading to 5.1 #55192

Open
@noahtallen

Description

@noahtallen

Bug Report

While working on upgrading Typescript to 5.1. from 4.7, I came across an issue with how generics are inferred with JS. Or, potentially not an issue, but a change in how it works that breaks existing code.

Importantly, this issue happens when you have a TS file importing a JS function importing a TS function. Previously, inference worked "good enough" for this scenario to work, but the change breaks it. (Unfortunately, this is a large, older codebase, so we migrate parts to TS as we can! In this case, there's a Typescript utility function, a JS redux selector using the utility, and a Typescript React component using the selector. But the only part that matters is the generic inference and having the JS file.)

🔎 Search Terms

Generics, arguments, JavaScript inference

🕗 Version & Regression Information

  • This changed between versions 4.7.4 and 5.1.6

⏯ Playground Link

Since this requires JS code in between to TS files, I can't replicate it in the TS playground. However, you can create the three short files I mentioned below and you'll see the issue! That said, here's the working code in full TS. All that needs to change is for getById to be written in JS, and the error occurs.

💻 Code

Consider this simplified higher order function. Fully implemented, it would be an optimized redux-style selector that only recalculates the selector when the dependents change. Both the selector and dependents have the same signature:

// create-selector.ts
export function createSelector< TState, TProps extends any[], TDerivedState >(
	selector: ( state: TState, ...props: TProps ) => TDerivedState,
	getDependents: ( state: TState, ...props: TProps ) => unknown
): ( state: TState, ...props: TProps ) => TDerivedState {
	return ( state, ...args ) => {
		getDependents( state, ...args );
		return selector( state, ...args );
	};
}

Here's a simple JS file with a new selector using that function:

// get-by-id.js
import { createSelector } from './create-selector';
export const getById = createSelector(
  ( state, id ) => state[ id ],
  ( state ) => state // the other arguments to the selector aren't necessary for dependents here
);

And here's a TS file where the selector is used:

import { getById } from './get-by-id';

// ERROR: Expected 1 argument, but got 2.
getById( { 1: 'test' }, 1 );

🙁 Actual behavior

The error is that getById expects the incorrect number of arguments. It can accept 2 arguments, but the type inference restricts it to 1. The issue is that in the JS file, the two argument functions have different signatures. Typescript infers the TProps type based on the second function -- so getById is inferred as (state: any) => any.

Interestingly, this is only an issue when the selector is written in JS, not TS. When getById is implemented in TS 5.1, it uses the first function to infer the type of getById -- so it becomes (state: State, id: number ) => string.

In other words, generic inference is inconsistent depending on if the function comes from JS or TS, despite most of the type information coming from a TS file in the first place!

I've not been able to find a workaround -- if we change to Partial< TProps > for the signature of getDependents, we encounter issues in other selectors where the args are always defined (since Partial means some of those args can be undefined).

🙂 Expected behavior

Before the update, Typescript seemingly inferred TProps based on both functions -- so getById becomes (state: any, id?: any) => any .

Now, I can understand that this situation is a bit tricky, and inferring based on both functions isn't ideal either. But I'm not sure how to express the types better here. getDependents will be called with all of the arguments, but it's not strictly necessary for the function body to accept all of those arguments when they might not be used. (And either way, this scenario works in TS, which indicates the basic premise is accepted by TS.)

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Needs InvestigationThis issue needs a team member to investigate its status.RescheduledThis issue was previously scheduled to an earlier milestone

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions