Repository navigation
Incorrect declaration emit for allowJs JavaScript class with static members imported from other files #33777
Description
TypeScript Version: 3.7.0-dev.20191002
Search Terms:
Code
Emitted index.d.ts from these JS files using --declaration --allowJs has an avoidable semantic error. It looks like the compiler usually avoids this error, but in this particular case it doesn't.
// foo.js
function foo() {}
export {foo}// index.js
import {foo} from './foo'
export {MyClass}
function MyClass() {}
MyClass.prototype = {
method() {}
}
MyClass.foo = fooExpected behavior:
This declaration is emitted:
// index.d.ts
export function MyClass(): void;
export class MyClass {
method(): void;
}
export namespace MyClass {
export { foo };
import { foo } from "./foo";
}
export {};Actual behavior:
This declaration is emitted:
// index.d.ts
export function MyClass(): void;
export class MyClass {
method(): void;
}
export namespace MyClass {
export { foo };
}
declare var foo: typeof foo; // <-- foo circularly references self
import { foo } from "./foo"; // <-- import foo conflicts with var foo
export {};
//# sourceMappingURL=index.d.ts.mapIt appears to be triggered by the combination of both function MyClass and MyClass.prototype = assignment. Removing one or the other fixes the bug, so that the import {foo} from './foo'; is nested within export namespace MyClass as in the "expected behavior" above.
Playground Link:
Related Issues:
Activity
weswigham commentedon Oct 30, 2019
To the OP: This should now be fixed on
master(so should go out in the next nightly) and in the next 3.7 cut (which should be final release at this point?), by #34786 (essentially a dupe of one of the reports in #33626)Your expected emit is a lil off though; we emit:
you're not allowed to have an
importstatement in a namespace, and the top-levelexport {};is unneeded in your example (as something in the file is exported, so the file's definitely a module, and there's no privates which need their scoping preserved)~typescript-bot commentedon Nov 2, 2019
This issue has been marked as a 'Duplicate' and has seen no recent activity. It has been automatically closed for house-keeping purposes.