question-mark
Stuck on an issue?

Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.

And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.

Import type over generic argument

See original GitHub issue

Search Terms

import type, generic, module string type

Suggestion

To allow for giving a generic argument as an import() type’s argument, something like function <Mod extends string>(obj: unknown, modPath: Mod): obj is import(Mod);

Use Cases

Would allow generic functions that type inference from any module path string literal to the type exported by that module. This is helpful for encapsulating good module loading practices. For instance, in a large AMD application I work on, we need to manage the application footprint by not loading modules that aren’t needed for the current execution path. There are a number of utility functions we could write around handling modules to support good behavior on this front.

Examples

One of the signatures of AMD’s require() could be typed as: function require<Mod extends string>(path: Mod): import(Mod); This actually does work today if that declaration is put in a .d.ts file and skipLibCheck is set to true. If a string literal is passed, the return type is inferred from the path; if non-literal, the return type is any. In fact, if this worked but disallowed anything other than a module path, it would be super handy for typo avoidance. I’m pretty sure what’s happening now is accidental, though, since any more complex use yields a “string literal expected” error on the import type.

Likewise, I’m pretty sure a really useful signature for define() could be done with a mapped type and tuple typed-rest params, something like:

type ImportsOf<Paths extends string[]> = { P in keyof Paths: import(Paths[P]) };
function define<Paths extends string[]>(paths: Paths, callback: (...args: ImportsOf<Paths>)=>void);

Specifically, the function I wanted to write with this was a type-narrowing instanceof check over a module path. Given a module that exports a constructor:

function isModuleInstance<Mod extends string>(obj: unknown, path: Mod): obj is InstanceType<import(Mod)> {
    const modValue = require(path);
    return modValue && obj instanceof modValue
}

If the module for a constructor hasn’t been loaded, we can assume no object has been constructed by it, so this technique is very handy for keeping down the module load footprint in applications with lots of modules.

A question for discussion would be the value of an import-type on a non-literal argument, or a non-module argument for that matter. My initial impression is if the import() type can’t be resolved, it should evaluate to never and produce an error just like import(‘some_garbage_string_i_made_up’)". That might require the type checker to be given a stricter bound than “extends string”, though. If necessary, a user-visible built-in type that means “a string representing a known module” seems like it might be useful in lots of contexts.

Checklist

My suggestion meets these guidelines:

  • [X ] This wouldn’t be a breaking change in existing TypeScript/JavaScript code
  • [X ] This wouldn’t change the runtime behavior of existing JavaScript code
  • [X ] This could be implemented without emitting different JS based on the types of the expressions
  • [X ] This isn’t a runtime feature (e.g. library functionality, non-ECMAScript syntax with JavaScript output, etc.)
  • [Seems like it to me] This feature would agree with the rest of TypeScript’s Design Goals.

Issue Analytics

  • State:open
  • Created 4 years ago
  • Reactions:26
  • Comments:8 (1 by maintainers)

github_iconTop GitHub Comments

6reactions
Raynoscommented, Jun 20, 2019

👍 this feature would also allow const foo = require('foo') to work similary to import foo = require('foo') because we can use this feature to define the type of require

5reactions
njakobcommented, Mar 12, 2020

Maybe supporting readonly for string constraints would help?

Consider the following example in order to type require:

declare function require<T extends const string>(path: T): import(T);

Since import expects a string literal (aka String literal expected.ts (1141)), marking the generic parameter as literal would match this requirement.

Read more comments on GitHub >

github_iconTop Results From Across the Web

Is there a way I can import types using a generic parameter?
It is not possible, at least as of TypeScript 4.6, to express " import types" of a form like import(T) or typeof import(T)...
Read more >
Documentation - Generics - TypeScript
This lets us see what type(s) we're generic over (e.g. Dictionary<string> rather than just Dictionary ). This makes the type parameter visible to...
Read more >
How To Use Generics in TypeScript - DigitalOcean
When creating interfaces and classes in TypeScript, it can be useful to use generic type parameters to set the shape of the resulting...
Read more >
typing — Support for type hints — Python 3.11.1 documentation
In the function greeting , the argument name is expected to be of type str and the ... from typing import TypeVar, Generic...
Read more >
Generics - mypy 0.991 documentation
Generic types have one or more type parameters, which can be arbitrary types. ... from typing import TypeVar, Generic T = TypeVar('T') class ......
Read more >

github_iconTop Related Medium Post

No results found

github_iconTop Related StackOverflow Question

No results found

github_iconTroubleshoot Live Code

Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start Free

github_iconTop Related Reddit Thread

No results found

github_iconTop Related Hackernoon Post

No results found

github_iconTop Related Tweet

No results found

github_iconTop Related Hashnode Post

No results found