Immutable-By-Default Flags
See original GitHub issueSearch Terms
readonly, default
Suggestion
Adding flags under the strict
umbrella to default to immutability in different cases, and a new mutable
keyword.
Use Cases
I’m creating this issue as a parent issue to track a couple of issues that already exist for specific cases:
- Class methods: https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/22315, https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/22315#issuecomment-400708470 in particular
- Arrays: https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/32467
- Interfaces: No issue yet, left a comment in https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/32467#issuecomment-519333922
Off of the top of my head, these flags would have some direct advantages:
- They clearly state the intention of the whole project in regards to mutability
- It’s very common for new members of teams to forget to add the
readonly
keyword or useT[]
rather thanReadonlyArray<T>
accidentally. Defaulting to immutability would help prevent these accidents, and amutable
keyword would be easy to find bytslint
or even a simplegrep
, to automatically request review in PRs or leave an automated commentthis PR introduces mutation
.
Examples
Examples should probably live in the children GitHub issues, but I’m copying here my comment for a quick example:
interface T {
n: number // immutable
mutable s: string // mutable
}
const o: T = {
n: 42,
s: 'hello world',
}
o.n = 43 // error
o.s = '👋🌎' // ok
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.
Backwards Compatibility
@AnyhowStep made an interesting comment on this issue.
Basically this feature wouldn’t be any problem for applications, but it could be problematic for libraries, as the emitted .d.ts
may be imported from a library/application that isn’t using this flag or is using an older TS version.
Possible solutions:
- A pre-processor directive (https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/32758#issuecomment-569369439)
- Always emitting
d.ts
withreadonly
, nevermutable
(possibly behind another flag?) - downlevel-dts
Records and Tuples
The Record and Tuple proposal has reached stage 2, so it may be arriving to TS soon-ish. It seems closely related to this issue, but I don’t think it fully addresses it.
readonly interface
The possibility of using the readonly
keyword for an entire interface
has been suggested in A cheaper, easier to implement middle ground could be https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/21152.
readonly interface State {
prop1: string;
prop2: string;
...
prop22: string;
}
This would probably be a much cheaper and less disruptive feature to implement, and could be a great starting point.
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 4 years ago
- Reactions:160
- Comments:17 (3 by maintainers)
Top GitHub Comments
Three reasons:
readonly
in one of the projects I work on daily, and it’s a relatively small codebase. And it’s just one project, we have a few.Why not a lint rule where
readonly
is always required?And if they want stuff to be mutable, add eslint-disable-next-line.
Not much to say about methods, though.