Conversation

ahejlsberg

With this PR we create type aliases for unresolved symbols such that quick info and error messages list back the unresolved name instead of just any.

In this example where ItemData is not defined:

function foo(items: ItemData[]) {
    let item = items[0];
}

hovering over item and items now shows ItemData and ItemData[] where previously we'd just show any and any[]. Furthermore, hovering over the unresolved ItemData reference shows type ItemData = /*unresolved*/ any.

Fixes #45893.

@typescript-bottypescript-bot added For Milestone BugPRs that fix a bug with a specific milestonelabels Sep 20, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Largely looks good, though I think this needs fourslash and possibly syntax server tests, specifically for

  • find all references
  • go to definition (at least the fact that it doesn't work)
  • quick info

@@ -4520,7 +4523,7 @@ namespace ts {
const noTruncation = compilerOptions.noErrorTruncation || flags & TypeFormatFlags.NoTruncation;
const typeNode = nodeBuilder.typeToTypeNode(type, enclosingDeclaration, toNodeBuilderFlags(flags) | NodeBuilderFlags.IgnoreErrors | (noTruncation ? NodeBuilderFlags.NoTruncation : 0), writer);
if (typeNode === undefined) return Debug.fail("should always get typenode");
const options = { removeComments: true };
const options = { removeComments: type !== unresolvedType };

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Would be helpful to leave a comment on this one (pun intended).

Suggested change
const options = { removeComments: type !== unresolvedType };
// The unresolved type gets a synthesized comment on `any`
// to hint to users that it's not a plain `any`.
// Otherwise, we always strip comments out.
const options = { removeComments: type !== unresolvedType };

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sure, I'll add a comment.

@@ -8255,6 +8269,10 @@ namespace ts {
return type && (type.flags & TypeFlags.Any) !== 0;
}

function isErrorType(type: Type) {
return type === errorType || !!(type.flags & TypeFlags.Any && type.aliasSymbol);

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why not just this? Seems like it'd be cheaper too.

Suggested change
return type === errorType || !!(type.flags & TypeFlags.Any && type.aliasSymbol);
return type === errorType || type === unresolvedType;

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No, that wouldn't work. I'll add a clarifying comment, but basically we want to identify the special TypeFlags.Any types produced by getTypeForTypeAliasReference for an unresolved symbol. The sole purpose of unresolvedType is to act as the declared type for the special type alias symbols we create for unresolved names. The type is never actually returned by anything because getTypeForTypeAliasReference maps it into a special TypeFlags.Any type with an aliasSymbol.

@@ -4,6 +4,6 @@ async function foo(): Promise<void> {

// Legal to use 'await' in a type context.
var v: await;
>v : any
>v : await

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there some way to make the type writer a little smarter here so that the team can differentiate between an unresolved and a concrete type?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We certainly have the ability to tell the difference, but what did you have in mind in terms of output? Remember that we're often dealing with composed types, e.g. for var v: Promise<await[]> we can't easily attach a comment to the await identifier in the output.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

A parenthesized type might work like (/*unresolved*/ await)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm not really sure we want to do that. We're already generate an error at every reference to an unresolved symbol, I don't think we also want the extra noise in the type baselines.

@DanielRosenwasser

I guess this doesn't technically fix #38836 because this only applies to types, right?

@ahejlsberg

Right, this doesn't fix #38836. One complication there would be what scope to introduce the unknown value symbols into. Should they be locals of the innermost enclosing function, or just globals like we do for the type symbols? The latter typically makes sense for types, but less clear for unresolved value symbols.

@DanielRosenwasser

or just globals like we do for the type symbols

I think just a global scope makes enough sense; if you do have a bunch of unresolved variables spread throughout your codebase, it's convenient to find-all-references, and likely to be a global anyhow; if it's mostly local (e.g. a user forgot to locally declare it), it doesn't really matter where you put it. But I'd understand if we wanted to take it one step at a time.

@DanielRosenwasser

Looks like there's a few conflicts that need to be resolved.

# Conflicts:
#	src/compiler/checker.ts
#	tests/cases/fourslash/findReferencesJSXTagName.ts
#	tests/cases/fourslash/tsxFindAllReferences10.ts
@ahejlsbergahejlsberg merged commit a4f9bf0 into main Sep 23, 2021
@ahejlsbergahejlsberg deleted the fix45893 branch September 23, 2021 20:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on . Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Author: Team For Milestone BugPRs that fix a bug with a specific milestone
None yet

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Improve display experience for unresolved symbols