Arguably improve declaration emit in two ways: #48491
Closed
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
…t written as a union with `undefined`
typescript-bot
added
Author: Team
For Milestone Bug
|
@typescript-bot perf test this |
|
Heya @andrewbranch, I've started to run the perf test suite on this PR at 0652347. You can monitor the build here. Update: The results are in! |
andrewbranch
commented
Mar 30, 2022
andrewbranch
changed the title
undefinedundefined
|
@andrewbranch Here they are:Comparison Report - main..48491
System
Hosts
Scenarios
Developer Information: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
andrewbranch
commented
Mar 30, 2022
| @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ | |||
| === tests/cases/compiler/DeclarationErrorsNoEmitOnError.ts === | |||
| type T = { x : number } | |||
| >T : Symbol(T, Decl(DeclarationErrorsNoEmitOnError.ts, 0, 0)) | |||
| >x : Symbol(x, Decl(DeclarationErrorsNoEmitOnError.ts, 0, 10)) | |||
| >x : Symbol(T.x, Decl(DeclarationErrorsNoEmitOnError.ts, 0, 10)) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When I saw 100+ baselines changed, I thought I had done something horribly wrong, but... this seems like an improvement?
andrewbranch
changed the title
undefined
andrewbranch
commented
Mar 31, 2022
| @@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ function test4( | |||
| >x : number | |||
|
|
|||
| arg4: ((a?: {x: number}, b?: {x: number}) => number) | ((a?: {y: number}) => number), | |||
| >arg4 : ((a?: { x: number; } | undefined, b?: { x: number; } | undefined) => number) | ((a?: { y: number; } | undefined) => number) | |||
| >arg4 : ((a?: { x: number;}, b?: { x: number;}) => number) | ((a?: { y: number;}) => number) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a little annoying but I guess it’s a general problem with reusing type annotation nodes, not specific to this change 🤔
|
@typescript-bot perf test this |
|
Heya @andrewbranch, I've started to run the perf test suite on this PR at c95d76f. You can monitor the build here. Update: The results are in! |
|
@andrewbranch Here they are:Comparison Report - main..48491
System
Hosts
Scenarios
Developer Information: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I’m a little concerned that this will substitute an equivalent type alias in declaration emit kind of randomly. Perhaps this should be applied in a more limited way, like only when the alternative is an ImportType? I feel like similar conversation came up when first discussing Smarter Type Alias Preservation in 4.1. |
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.
undefined.lookupSymbolChainto avoid writing an ImportType for a type annotation when you could use a reference to a local type alias instead. This also changes a bunch of symbol baselines to add qualification of members of object type literals assigned to type aliases. The same kind of change appears in a few quick info tests, which makes the display of type alias members more similar to interface members.Fixes #47849
(I think the repro contains multiple unrelated bugs, but this fixes the one I discussed in the issue. Will check the other and open a new bug if needed.)
Note: Change (2) is enough to fix #47849 alone, so we can back (1) back out if people have objections, but personally I like that some unnecessary characters are dropped from type display.