我的目标是在isNull中编写谓词函数(例如,isUndefined和TypeScript ),满足以下条件:
array.filter(isNull)array.filter(and(not(isNull), not(isUndefined)))array.filter(isNull)的返回类型将是null[]const isNotNull = not(isNull)前两个条件很容易实现:
type Predicate = (i: any) => boolean;
const and = (p1: Predicate, p2: Predicate) =>
(i: any) => p1(i) && p2(i);
const or = (p1: Predicate, p2: Predicate) =>
(i: any) => p1(i) || p2(i);
const not = (p: Predicate) =>
(i: any) => !p(i);
const isNull = (i: any) =>
i === null;
const isUndefined = (i: any) =>
i === undefined;
const items = [ "foo", null, 123, undefined, true ];
const filtered = items.filter(and(not(isNull), not(isUndefined)));
console.log(filtered);但是,由于这里没有使用类型保护,TypeScript假设变量filtered与items具有相同的类型,即(string,number,boolean,null,undefined)[],而现在它实际上应该是(string,number,boolean)[]。
所以我添加了一些打字脚本的魔法:
type Diff<T, U> = T extends U ? never : T;
type Predicate<I, O extends I> = (i: I) => i is O;
const and = <I, O1 extends I, O2 extends I>(p1: Predicate<I, O1>, p2: Predicate<I, O2>) =>
(i: I): i is (O1 & O2) => p1(i) && p2(i);
const or = <I, O1 extends I, O2 extends I>(p1: Predicate<I, O1>, p2: Predicate<I, O2>) =>
(i: I): i is (O1 | O2) => p1(i) || p2(i);
const not = <I, O extends I>(p: Predicate<I, O>) =>
(i: I): i is (Diff<I, O>) => !p(i);
const isNull = <I>(i: I | null): i is null =>
i === null;
const isUndefined = <I>(i: I | undefined): i is undefined =>
i === undefined;现在看来,filtered被正确地简化为(string,number,boolean)[]类型。
但是,由于not(isNull)可能经常被使用,所以我希望将其提取到一个新的谓词函数中:
const isNotNull = not(isNull);虽然这在运行时非常有效,但不幸的是它没有编译(启用严格模式的TypeScript 3.3.3 ):
Argument of type '<I>(i: I | null) => i is null' is not assignable to parameter of type 'Predicate<{}, {}>'.
Type predicate 'i is null' is not assignable to 'i is {}'.
Type 'null' is not assignable to type '{}'.ts(2345)因此,当使用谓词作为数组的参数时,filter方法TypeScript可以从数组中推断出I的类型,但是当将谓词提取到单独的函数中时,这就不再起作用了,TypeScript回到了基本对象类型{},它破坏了一切。
有办法解决这个问题吗?说服TypeScript坚持泛型类型I而不是在定义isNotNull函数时将其解析为{}的一些技巧?或者这是TypeScript的一个限制,目前无法完成?
发布于 2021-07-19 19:16:27
刚刚在这里找到了我自己两年的问题,然后用最新的TypeScript版本(4.3.5)再试一次,这个问题就不再存在了。以下代码编译得很好,并且正确地推断了类型:
type Diff<T, U> = T extends U ? never : T;
type Predicate<I, O extends I> = (i: I) => i is O;
const and = <I, O1 extends I, O2 extends I>(p1: Predicate<I, O1>, p2: Predicate<I, O2>) =>
(i: I): i is (O1 & O2) => p1(i) && p2(i);
const or = <I, O1 extends I, O2 extends I>(p1: Predicate<I, O1>, p2: Predicate<I, O2>) =>
(i: I): i is (O1 | O2) => p1(i) || p2(i);
const not = <I, O extends I>(p: Predicate<I, O>) =>
(i: I): i is (Diff<I, O>) => !p(i);
const isNull = <I>(i: I | null): i is null =>
i === null;
const isUndefined = <I>(i: I | undefined): i is undefined =>
i === undefined;
const isNotNull = not(isNull);
const isNotUndefined = not(isUndefined);
const items = [ "foo", null, 123, undefined, true ];
const filtered = items.filter(and(isNotNull, isNotUndefined));
console.log(filtered);发布于 2019-02-22 10:23:30
从上下文传递类型信息。这段代码编译得很好
// c: (string | number)[]
let c = [1, 2, 'b', 'a', null].filter(not<number | string | null, null>(isNull)); https://stackoverflow.com/questions/54801835
复制相似问题