Accomodate TS 4.7's new union order in dtslint tests #847
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
Similar to our test failures, others have struggled with dtslint failing (false negative) due to inconsistent union type ordering. It appears that $ExpectType <union> can be extended to list different orderings for union types (permutations). In our case we have encountered issues with this rule: ``` // $ExpectType Duration | Time ``` Extending this rule with an alternative ordering: ``` // $ExpectType Duration | Time || Time | Duration ```
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Similar to our test failures, others have struggled with dtslint failing
(false negative) due to inconsistent union type ordering. It appears
that $ExpectType can be extended to list different orderings for
union types (permutations). In our case we have encountered issues with
this rule:
Extending this rule with an alternative ordering: