Literal not contextually narrowed when returned from an abstract method

[ssalbdivad]

🔎 Search Terms

symbol string number literal abstract narrow return class subclass

🕗 Version & Regression Information

• This is the behavior in every version I tried

⏯ Playground Link

https://www.typescriptlang.org/play?#code/MYewdgzgLgBGCuBbGBeGBWAsAKFJW0ATqjAEQBmIIpOe0MEAnsmgMrMBGIANgBQCUOHAEMORYcFjBuwiBBgAhWQFMYAbxwwtMUeMkwA5sqisohAJZgDAgFxlK1Tdt1mJsI1ABySDssK2MJy0XQjdDY3ZELj5+OyhGAAdlEHIGZiCdMVd9DwBhWShlABNI6ID4pJS0xBwAXyFcGTkYXIALc24imGUAD0KwIvklCFUNbG0YAHpJmABRQkIQQjsAFUTVAHIiSwMNmHN5MBBYWQhzAzBRblUoEBgKzYoqUg2Mj1MLKwF1DInCY3ghDADDMGXq2Ay0zmCyWq3WMA2CCifj2Bzgxx0cnOlw413udweCPQr3G2g83mR-n4P1JEy0-yggOBSLBDQmUPmi2WWjWSQRTCiPFRhwxp2xVxuBPhG3gYHMAEd4KoBdESRN3pweN8xnTtAymdVWRDaVMZpzYTzpSqhfsRScsRcJfj7tLZQqldVVW9jPloMVSlrqTrdaaYKxzIgOsJCNxGDBgAUdiDiEs4EhnQ8qkQYKnM6kkTB-hAkpJzAA3ZSxmBFEDKeT-RAgCv3VqqPxcgA0DAJ7XkI2UiHktxgvhgbsVkpbys13HjKl+eoBQOqmJdlVSAqN4KAA

💻 Code

const num = 5
const str = "foo"
const sym = Symbol()

abstract class Base {
    abstract getString(): "foo"
    abstract getNumber(): 5
    abstract getSymbol(): typeof sym
    abstract getCastedSymbol(): typeof sym
}

class Child extends Base {
    // Error: Type 'string' is not assignable to type '"foo"'
    getString() {
        return str
    }

    // Error: Type 'number' is not assignable to type '5'
    getNumber() {
        return num
    }

    // Error:  Type 'symbol' is not assignable to type 'unique symbol'
    getSymbol() {
        return sym
    }

    // Error:  Type 'symbol' is not assignable to type 'unique symbol'
    getCastedSymbol() {
        // Similarly casting str or num to typeof str or typeof num respectively does remove the error, so this seems to be unique to the symbol case
        return sym as typeof sym
    }
}

🙁 Actual behavior

Return types were not contextually narrowed and allowed.

🙂 Expected behavior

Return types are contextually narrowed and allowed. Currently the best workaround is to add an explicit return annotation. Symbol case is possibly related to #53276, associated PR is #54778

[MartinJohns]

I believe this to be a duplicate of #32082.

[ssalbdivad]

@MartinJohns Interesting, it does seem related although it explicitly states:

This proposal only applies to implements, not extends

It also seems like beyond the lack of literal narrowing here, the fact that the symbol type doesn't work even when cast seems worth addressing.

[RyanCavanaugh]

This is more in spirit of #23911 - the method signature (both param and return type) should ideally be modified by the extends type as well

[typescript-bot]

This issue has been marked as "Duplicate" and has seen no recent activity. It has been automatically closed for house-keeping purposes.

[ssalbdivad]

@RyanCavanaugh I would love to have full parameter inference when extending a class, but a lot of my confusion around this was a lack of understanding how "fresh" literal references work, because my intuition was that the function should normally be inferred as returning the const type (which I still believe it probably should, but that seems unlikely to change).

That said, the symbol case seems clearly to be distinct from the issue you mentioned- there is no question that if I explicitly cast the return type like that, it should be inferred that way like the literal types, right?

Is there an existing issue for this?

[ssalbdivad]

Symbol return type widening is tracked here.