[英]Typescript union type does not throw error
So, type definitions:所以,类型定义:
// type definitions
class GenericDto {
public ids: string[] = [];
public dateFrom: string | null = null;
public dateTo: string | null = null;
}
class FleetInformationDto extends GenericDto { }
class VehicleInformationDto extends GenericDto { }
enum ReportQueueAction {
GENERATE
}
enum ReportQueueType {
VEHICLE_INFORMATION,
FLEET_INFORMATION
}
type ReportQueue = {
action: ReportQueueAction;
type: ReportQueueType.FLEET_INFORMATION;
dto: FleetInformationDto
} | {
action: ReportQueueAction,
type: ReportQueueType.VEHICLE_INFORMATION,
dto: VehicleInformationDto;
}
and implementation:和实施:
// implementation
const dto: FleetInformationDto = {
ids: ["1", "2"],
dateFrom: '2021-01-01',
dateTo: '2021-02-01'
}
const queueData: ReportQueue = {
action: ReportQueueAction.GENERATE,
type: ReportQueueType.FLEET_INFORMATION,
dto: dto
}
// ^ works as expected
but if we add "VehicleInformationDto" to type FLEET_INFORMATION it does not throw error但是如果我们添加“VehicleInformationDto”来输入 FLEET_INFORMATION 它不会抛出错误
const dto2: VehicleInformationDto = {
ids: ["1", "2"],
dateFrom: '2021-01-01',
dateTo: '2021-02-01'
}
const queueData2: ReportQueue = {
action: ReportQueueAction.GENERATE,
type: ReportQueueType.FLEET_INFORMATION,
dto: dto2 // <-- no error thrown here
}
well, what's the catch here?好吧,这里有什么问题? am i missing something?
我错过了什么吗?
The question: Why am I able to assign VehicleInformationDto
to dto
inside queueData2
when typescript expects it to be FleetInformationDto
?问题:为什么当 typescript 期望它是
queueData2
时,我可以将VehicleInformationDto
分配给FleetInformationDto
内的dto
?
Edit: OK, yeah, it's because they share the same properties, then, how could I add a check for that?编辑:好的,是的,这是因为它们共享相同的属性,那么,我该如何添加检查呢?
Typescript is structurally typed, not nominally typed . Typescript 是结构类型的,不是名义上的类型。 This means that as far as Typescript is concerned these are the same type:
这意味着就 Typescript 而言,这些是相同的类型:
class FleetInformationDto extends GenericDto { }
class VehicleInformationDto extends GenericDto { }
While I think this is absolutely the correct choice for adding static typing to a language like Javascript where objects are a grab-bag of properties, it can lead to some subtle gotchas:虽然我认为这绝对是将 static 类型添加到像 Javascript 这样的语言(其中对象是属性的抓包)中的正确选择,但它可能会导致一些微妙的陷阱:
interface Vec2 {
x: number
y: number
}
interface Vec3 {
x: number
y: number
z: number
}
const m = { x: 0, y: 0, z: "hello world" };
const n: Vec2 = m; // N.B. structurally m qualifies as Vec2!
function f(x: Vec2 | Vec3) {
if (x.z) return x.z.toFixed(2); // This fails if z is not a number!
}
f(n); // compiler must allow this call
Here we're doing some graphics programming and have 2D and 3D vectors, but we have a problem: objects can have extra properties and still structurally qualify which leads to a problem in this union type (sound familiar?).在这里,我们正在做一些图形编程并且有 2D 和 3D 向量,但是我们有一个问题:对象可以有额外的属性并且仍然在结构上限定,这会导致这种联合类型的问题(听起来很熟悉?)。
The answer in your particular case is to use a discriminant to easily distinguish the similar types in the union:在您的特定情况下,答案是使用判别式轻松区分联合中的相似类型:
interface FleetInformationDto extends GenericDto {
// N.B., fleet is a literal *type*, not a string literal
// *value*.
kind: 'fleet'
}
interface VehicleInformationDto extends GenericDto {
kind: 'vehicle'
}
Here I've used strings, but any unique compile-time constant (any primitive value or members of an enum
) will do.这里我使用了字符串,但任何唯一的编译时常量(任何原始值或
enum
的成员)都可以。 Also, since you're not instantiating your classes and using them purely as types I've made them interfaces but the same principles apply.此外,由于您没有实例化您的类并将它们纯粹用作类型,因此我将它们设为接口,但适用相同的原则。
And now you can clearly see the error that type 'fleet' is not assignable to type 'vehicle'.现在您可以清楚地看到“车队”类型不可分配给“车辆”类型的错误。
声明:本站的技术帖子网页,遵循CC BY-SA 4.0协议,如果您需要转载,请注明本站网址或者原文地址。任何问题请咨询:yoyou2525@163.com.