Skip to content

chore(types): compatible with TS 5.8 #12973

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Sep 2, 2025
Merged

chore(types): compatible with TS 5.8 #12973

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
3fdd1c4
types: compatible with TS 5.8
yangmingshan Mar 1, 2025
139a4d4
types: undo unnecessary changes
yangmingshan Mar 3, 2025
1a70104
types: add type tests for nextTick
yangmingshan Mar 3, 2025
caf4330
chore: small tweaks
edison1105 Sep 1, 2025
fac379a
Merge branch 'main' into type
edison1105 Sep 1, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion packages/compiler-core/src/transforms/vFor.ts
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -263,7 +263,7 @@ export function processFor(
dir: DirectiveNode,
context: TransformContext,
processCodegen?: (forNode: ForNode) => (() => void) | undefined,
) {
): (() => void) | undefined {
if (!dir.exp) {
context.onError(
createCompilerError(ErrorCodes.X_V_FOR_NO_EXPRESSION, dir.loc),
Expand Down
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion packages/compiler-sfc/src/script/defineModel.ts
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ export function processDefineModel(
return true
}

export function genModelProps(ctx: ScriptCompileContext) {
export function genModelProps(ctx: ScriptCompileContext): string | undefined {
if (!ctx.hasDefineModelCall) return

const isProd = !!ctx.options.isProd
Expand Down
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion packages/reactivity/src/ref.ts
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -275,7 +275,7 @@ export function proxyRefs<T extends object>(
objectWithRefs: T,
): ShallowUnwrapRef<T> {
return isReactive(objectWithRefs)
? objectWithRefs
? (objectWithRefs as any)
: new Proxy(objectWithRefs, shallowUnwrapHandlers)
}

Expand Down
17 changes: 12 additions & 5 deletions packages/runtime-core/src/scheduler.ts
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -47,16 +47,21 @@ const pendingPostFlushCbs: SchedulerJob[] = []
let activePostFlushCbs: SchedulerJob[] | null = null
let postFlushIndex = 0

const resolvedPromise = /*@__PURE__*/ Promise.resolve() as Promise<any>
const resolvedPromise = /*@__PURE__*/ Promise.resolve()
let currentFlushPromise: Promise<void> | null = null

const RECURSION_LIMIT = 100
type CountMap = Map<SchedulerJob, number>

export function nextTick<T = void, R = void>(
export function nextTick(): Promise<void>
export function nextTick<T, R>(
this: T,
fn?: (this: T) => R,
): Promise<Awaited<R>> {
fn: (this: T) => R | Promise<R>,
): Promise<R>
export function nextTick<T, R>(
this: T,
fn?: (this: T) => R | Promise<R>,
): Promise<void | R> {
const p = currentFlushPromise || resolvedPromise
return fn ? p.then(this ? fn.bind(this) : fn) : p
}
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -113,7 +118,9 @@ export function queueJob(job: SchedulerJob): void {

function queueFlush() {
if (!currentFlushPromise) {
currentFlushPromise = resolvedPromise.then(flushJobs)
currentFlushPromise = resolvedPromise.then(() => {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I tested that revert this change and the change of line 50.
tsc works fine.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes. I just thought we can get rid of the type assertion, I can change it back.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Reverted.

flushJobs()
})
}
}

Expand Down