Fix debug assert in getConstructorDefinedThisAssignmentTypes #52321
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
typescript-bot
added
Author: Team
For Uncommitted Bug
|
#51524 seems more correct to me. |
|
@typescript-bot pack this |
|
Heya @DanielRosenwasser, I've started to run the tarball bundle task on this PR at a50fd5f. You can monitor the build here. |
|
@typescript-bot user test tsserver |
|
Heya @DanielRosenwasser, I've started to run the diff-based top-repos suite (tsserver) on this PR at a50fd5f. You can monitor the build here. |
|
Heya @DanielRosenwasser, I've started to run the diff-based user code test suite (tsserver) on this PR at a50fd5f. You can monitor the build here. |
Co-authored-by: Oleksandr T <[email protected]>
typescript-bot
added
For Milestone Bug
|
Pulled the other test (with with attribution) |
|
@typescript-bot pack this |
|
Heya @DanielRosenwasser, I've started to run the diff-based user code test suite (tsserver) on this PR at b3c27eb. You can monitor the build here. Update: The results are in! |
|
Heya @DanielRosenwasser, I've started to run the diff-based top-repos suite (tsserver) on this PR at b3c27eb. You can monitor the build here. Update: The results are in! |
|
Heya @DanielRosenwasser, I've started to run the tarball bundle task on this PR at b3c27eb. You can monitor the build here. |
|
Hey @DanielRosenwasser, I've packed this into an installable tgz. You can install it for testing by referencing it in your and then running There is also a playground for this build and an npm module you can use via |
|
@DanielRosenwasser Here are the results of running the user test suite comparing Everything looks good! |
|
I actually think this PR is not quite right either. Why are we even trying to go down this path? It really does feel like the right fix is to fix up the logic in You can check out #52323 to see my latest attempt. |
|
@DanielRosenwasser Here are the results of running the top-repos suite comparing Something interesting changed - please have a look. Detailspalantir/blueprint
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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 #51521
It turns out the above has been lingering around for a while; this one shows up in the top100 tsserver traces somewhat often, i.e. #52317 (comment)
The requests all happen in babel's testing artifacts, which have the extension
jsbut are in fact not JS. The one in the repro contains TypeScript code.It seems like the bug is clear; this loop iterates over declarations to build an array of types, except that sometimes it can
continueand skip over a declaration it doesn't like. But then, we pass that (smaller) array of types along with the original declaration array. The two need to be the same size as they are effectively zipped, but the loop explicitly doesn't guarantee that the two are going to be the same length. So, we can just build the list of declarations we actually cared about and then provide that instead.But, I have absolutely no clue how to actually test this; it takes tsreplay 700 some requests to get the files into the right state for this to appear and I quite know how to reduce that when I can't reproduce it myself in the editor.