-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13k
Open
Labels
Awaiting More FeedbackThis means we'd like to hear from more people who would be helped by this featureThis means we'd like to hear from more people who would be helped by this featureSuggestionAn idea for TypeScriptAn idea for TypeScript
Description
Search Terms
ES6 function name, const assertions, as const
, function as const
Suggestion
I would like to see the name
property of functions to be available at compile time if the given function is a const
expression, e.g.:
class Test {
public a() { console.log("Test.a"); }
public b() { console.log("Test.b"); }
}
type FunctionWithName<N> = (...args: any[]) => any & { readonly name: N };
function replaceFunction<T, K extends keyof T>(target: T, fn: FunctionWithName<K>) {
target[fn.name] = fn;
}
// proposed inline syntax
let testInstance = new Test();
replaceFunction(testInstance, function a() { console.log("Replacement.a"); })
// proposed "as const" syntax
const newB = function b() {
console.log("Replacement.b");
} as const;
replaceFunction(testInstance, newB);
// example of a compile time error since "c" is not assignable to "a" | "b"
replaceFunction(testInstance, function c() { console.log("Replacement.a"); })
Use Cases
My use case is a function like shown above, where I would like to have static type checking available, without having to specify the extra parameter that specifies the function name to replace, e.g. compare:
// current syntax:
replaceFunction(testInstance, "a", function a() { /* ... */ });
// proposed syntax:
replaceFunction(testInstance, function a() { /* ... */ });
Examples
let myObject = {
a: () => "a",
b: () => "b"
}
// fictional "mocking" library:
// this syntax can only validate that "a" is in "myObject" through the const "a" parameter
mockingLibrary.mock(myObject, "a", function a() { return "different value" });
// proposed style, using Function.prototype.name
mockingLibrary.mock(myObject, function a() { return "different value" });
Checklist
My suggestion meets these guidelines:
- This wouldn't be a breaking change in existing TypeScript/JavaScript code
- This wouldn't change the runtime behavior of existing JavaScript code
- This could be implemented without emitting different JS based on the types of the expressions
- This isn't a runtime feature (e.g. library functionality, non-ECMAScript syntax with JavaScript output, etc.)
- This feature would agree with the rest of TypeScript's Design Goals.
sean-vieira
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
Awaiting More FeedbackThis means we'd like to hear from more people who would be helped by this featureThis means we'd like to hear from more people who would be helped by this featureSuggestionAn idea for TypeScriptAn idea for TypeScript