In JavaScript, the fundamental way that we group and pass around data is through objects. In TypeScript, we represent those through object types.
As we’ve seen, they can be anonymous:
tsTry
functiongreet (person : {name : string;age : number }) {return "Hello " +person .name ;}
or they can be named by using either an interface:
tsTry
interfacePerson {name : string;age : number;}functiongreet (person :Person ) {return "Hello " +person .name ;}
or a type alias:
tsTry
typePerson = {name : string;age : number;};functiongreet (person :Person ) {return "Hello " +person .name ;}
In all three examples above, we’ve written functions that take objects that contain the property name
(which must be a string
) and age
(which must be a number
).
Quick Reference
We have cheat-sheets available for both type
and interface
, if you want a quick look at the important every-day syntax at a glance.
Property Modifiers
Each property in an object type can specify a couple of things: the type, whether the property is optional, and whether the property can be written to.
Optional Properties
Much of the time, we’ll find ourselves dealing with objects that might have a property set.
In those cases, we can mark those properties as optional by adding a question mark (?
) to the end of their names.
tsTry
interfacePaintOptions {shape :Shape ;xPos ?: number;yPos ?: number;}functionpaintShape (opts :PaintOptions ) {// ...}constshape =getShape ();paintShape ({shape });paintShape ({shape ,xPos : 100 });paintShape ({shape ,yPos : 100 });paintShape ({shape ,xPos : 100,yPos : 100 });
In this example, both xPos
and yPos
are considered optional.
We can choose to provide either of them, so every call above to paintShape
is valid.
All optionality really says is that if the property is set, it better have a specific type.
We can also read from those properties - but when we do under strictNullChecks
, TypeScript will tell us they’re potentially undefined
.
tsTry
functionpaintShape (opts :PaintOptions ) {letxPos =opts .xPos ;letyPos =opts .yPos ;// ...}
In JavaScript, even if the property has never been set, we can still access it - it’s just going to give us the value undefined
.
We can just handle undefined
specially by checking for it.
tsTry
functionpaintShape (opts :PaintOptions ) {letxPos =opts .xPos ===undefined ? 0 :opts .xPos ;letyPos =opts .yPos ===undefined ? 0 :opts .yPos ;// ...}
Note that this pattern of setting defaults for unspecified values is so common that JavaScript has syntax to support it.
tsTry
functionpaintShape ({shape ,xPos = 0,yPos = 0 }:PaintOptions ) {console .log ("x coordinate at",xPos );console .log ("y coordinate at",yPos );// ...}
Here we used a destructuring pattern for paintShape
’s parameter, and provided default values for xPos
and yPos
.
Now xPos
and yPos
are both definitely present within the body of paintShape
, but optional for any callers to paintShape
.
Note that there is currently no way to place type annotations within destructuring patterns. This is because the following syntax already means something different in JavaScript.
tsTry
functiondraw ({shape :Shape ,xPos :number = 100 /*...*/ }) {Cannot find name 'shape'. Did you mean 'Shape'?2552Cannot find name 'shape'. Did you mean 'Shape'?render (); shape Cannot find name 'xPos'.2304Cannot find name 'xPos'.render (); xPos }In an object destructuring pattern,
shape: Shape
means “grab the propertyshape
and redefine it locally as a variable namedShape
.” LikewisexPos: number
creates a variable namednumber
whose value is based on the parameter’sxPos
.
readonly
Properties
Properties can also be marked as readonly
for TypeScript.
While it won’t change any behavior at runtime, a property marked as readonly
can’t be written to during type-checking.
tsTry
interfaceSomeType {readonlyprop : string;}functiondoSomething (obj :SomeType ) {// We can read from 'obj.prop'.console .log (`prop has the value '${obj .prop }'.`);// But we can't re-assign it.Cannot assign to 'prop' because it is a read-only property.2540Cannot assign to 'prop' because it is a read-only property.obj .= "hello"; prop }
Using the readonly
modifier doesn’t necessarily imply that a value is totally immutable - or in other words, that its internal contents can’t be changed.
It just means the property itself can’t be re-written to.
tsTry
interfaceHome {readonlyresident : {name : string;age : number };}functionvisitForBirthday (home :Home ) {// We can read and update properties from 'home.resident'.console .log (`Happy birthday ${home .resident .name }!`);home .resident .age ++;}functionevict (home :Home ) {// But we can't write to the 'resident' property itself on a 'Home'.Cannot assign to 'resident' because it is a read-only property.2540Cannot assign to 'resident' because it is a read-only property.home .= { resident name : "Victor the Evictor",age : 42,};}
It’s important to manage expectations of what readonly
implies.
It’s useful to signal intent during development time for TypeScript on how an object should be used.
TypeScript doesn’t factor in whether properties on two types are readonly
when checking whether those types are compatible, so readonly
properties can also change via aliasing.
tsTry
interfacePerson {name : string;age : number;}interfaceReadonlyPerson {readonlyname : string;readonlyage : number;}letwritablePerson :Person = {name : "Person McPersonface",age : 42,};// worksletreadonlyPerson :ReadonlyPerson =writablePerson ;console .log (readonlyPerson .age ); // prints '42'writablePerson .age ++;console .log (readonlyPerson .age ); // prints '43'
Using mapping modifiers, you can remove readonly
attributes.
Index Signatures
Sometimes you don’t know all the names of a type’s properties ahead of time, but you do know the shape of the values.
In those cases you can use an index signature to describe the types of possible values, for example:
tsTry
interfaceStringArray {[index : number]: string;}constmyArray :StringArray =getStringArray ();constsecondItem =myArray [1];
Above, we have a StringArray
interface which has an index signature.
This index signature states that when a StringArray
is indexed with a number
, it will return a string
.
Only some types are allowed for index signature properties: string
, number
, symbol
, template string patterns, and union types consisting only of these.
It is possible to support multiple types of indexers...
It is possible to support multiple types of indexers. Note that when using both `number` and `string` indexers, the type returned from a numeric indexer must be a subtype of the type returned from the string indexer. This is because when indexing with a number
, JavaScript will actually convert that to a string
before indexing into an object. That means that indexing with 100
(a number
) is the same thing as indexing with "100"
(a string
), so the two need to be consistent.
tsTry
interfaceAnimal {name : string;}interfaceDog extendsAnimal {breed : string;}// Error: indexing with a numeric string might get you a completely separate type of Animal!interfaceNotOkay {['number' index type 'Animal' is not assignable to 'string' index type 'Dog'.2413'number' index type 'Animal' is not assignable to 'string' index type 'Dog'.x : number]:Animal ;[x : string]:Dog ;}
While string index signatures are a powerful way to describe the “dictionary” pattern, they also enforce that all properties match their return type.
This is because a string index declares that obj.property
is also available as obj["property"]
.
In the following example, name
’s type does not match the string index’s type, and the type checker gives an error:
tsTry
interfaceNumberDictionary {[index : string]: number;length : number; // okProperty 'name' of type 'string' is not assignable to 'string' index type 'number'.2411Property 'name' of type 'string' is not assignable to 'string' index type 'number'.: string; name }
However, properties of different types are acceptable if the index signature is a union of the property types:
tsTry
interfaceNumberOrStringDictionary {[index : string]: number | string;length : number; // ok, length is a numbername : string; // ok, name is a string}
Finally, you can make index signatures readonly
in order to prevent assignment to their indices:
tsTry
interfaceReadonlyStringArray {readonly [index : number]: string;}letmyArray :ReadonlyStringArray =getReadOnlyStringArray ();Index signature in type 'ReadonlyStringArray' only permits reading.2542Index signature in type 'ReadonlyStringArray' only permits reading.myArray [2] = "Mallory";
You can’t set myArray[2]
because the index signature is readonly
.
Excess Property Checks
Where and how an object is assigned a type can make a difference in the type system. One of the key examples of this is in excess property checking, which validates the object more thoroughly when it is created and assigned to an object type during creation.
tsTry
interfaceSquareConfig {color ?: string;width ?: number;}functioncreateSquare (config :SquareConfig ): {color : string;area : number } {return {color :config .color || "red",area :config .width ?config .width *config .width : 20,};}letObject literal may only specify known properties, but 'colour' does not exist in type 'SquareConfig'. Did you mean to write 'color'?2561Object literal may only specify known properties, but 'colour' does not exist in type 'SquareConfig'. Did you mean to write 'color'?mySquare =createSquare ({: "red", colour width : 100 });
Notice the given argument to createSquare
is spelled colour
instead of color
.
In plain JavaScript, this sort of thing fails silently.
You could argue that this program is correctly typed, since the width
properties are compatible, there’s no color
property present, and the extra colour
property is insignificant.
However, TypeScript takes the stance that there’s probably a bug in this code. Object literals get special treatment and undergo excess property checking when assigning them to other variables, or passing them as arguments. If an object literal has any properties that the “target type” doesn’t have, you’ll get an error:
tsTry
letObject literal may only specify known properties, but 'colour' does not exist in type 'SquareConfig'. Did you mean to write 'color'?2561Object literal may only specify known properties, but 'colour' does not exist in type 'SquareConfig'. Did you mean to write 'color'?mySquare =createSquare ({: "red", colour width : 100 });
Getting around these checks is actually really simple. The easiest method is to just use a type assertion:
tsTry
letmySquare =createSquare ({width : 100,opacity : 0.5 } asSquareConfig );
However, a better approach might be to add a string index signature if you’re sure that the object can have some extra properties that are used in some special way.
If SquareConfig
can have color
and width
properties with the above types, but could also have any number of other properties, then we could define it like so:
tsTry
interfaceSquareConfig {color ?: string;width ?: number;[propName : string]: any;}
Here we’re saying that SquareConfig
can have any number of properties, and as long as they aren’t color
or width
, their types don’t matter.
One final way to get around these checks, which might be a bit surprising, is to assign the object to another variable:
Since assigning squareOptions
won’t undergo excess property checks, the compiler won’t give you an error:
tsTry
letsquareOptions = {colour : "red",width : 100 };letmySquare =createSquare (squareOptions );
The above workaround will work as long as you have a common property between squareOptions
and SquareConfig
.
In this example, it was the property width
. It will however, fail if the variable does not have any common object property. For example:
tsTry
letsquareOptions = {colour : "red" };letType '{ colour: string; }' has no properties in common with type 'SquareConfig'.2559Type '{ colour: string; }' has no properties in common with type 'SquareConfig'.mySquare =createSquare (); squareOptions
Keep in mind that for simple code like above, you probably shouldn’t be trying to “get around” these checks. For more complex object literals that have methods and hold state, you might need to keep these techniques in mind, but a majority of excess property errors are actually bugs.
That means if you’re running into excess property checking problems for something like option bags, you might need to revise some of your type declarations.
In this instance, if it’s okay to pass an object with both a color
or colour
property to createSquare
, you should fix up the definition of SquareConfig
to reflect that.
Extending Types
It’s pretty common to have types that might be more specific versions of other types.
For example, we might have a BasicAddress
type that describes the fields necessary for sending letters and packages in the U.S.
tsTry
interfaceBasicAddress {name ?: string;street : string;city : string;country : string;postalCode : string;}
In some situations that’s enough, but addresses often have a unit number associated with them if the building at an address has multiple units.
We can then describe an AddressWithUnit
.
tsTry
interfaceAddressWithUnit {name ?: string;unit : string;street : string;city : string;country : string;postalCode : string;}
This does the job, but the downside here is that we had to repeat all the other fields from BasicAddress
when our changes were purely additive.
Instead, we can extend the original BasicAddress
type and just add the new fields that are unique to AddressWithUnit
.
tsTry
interfaceBasicAddress {name ?: string;street : string;city : string;country : string;postalCode : string;}interfaceAddressWithUnit extendsBasicAddress {unit : string;}
The extends
keyword on an interface
allows us to effectively copy members from other named types, and add whatever new members we want.
This can be useful for cutting down the amount of type declaration boilerplate we have to write, and for signaling intent that several different declarations of the same property might be related.
For example, AddressWithUnit
didn’t need to repeat the street
property, and because street
originates from BasicAddress
, a reader will know that those two types are related in some way.
interface
s can also extend from multiple types.
tsTry
interfaceColorful {color : string;}interfaceCircle {radius : number;}interfaceColorfulCircle extendsColorful ,Circle {}constcc :ColorfulCircle = {color : "red",radius : 42,};
Intersection Types
interface
s allowed us to build up new types from other types by extending them.
TypeScript provides another construct called intersection types that is mainly used to combine existing object types.
An intersection type is defined using the &
operator.
tsTry
interfaceColorful {color : string;}interfaceCircle {radius : number;}typeColorfulCircle =Colorful &Circle ;
Here, we’ve intersected Colorful
and Circle
to produce a new type that has all the members of Colorful
and Circle
.
tsTry
functiondraw (circle :Colorful &Circle ) {console .log (`Color was ${circle .color }`);console .log (`Radius was ${circle .radius }`);}// okaydraw ({color : "blue",radius : 42 });// oopsObject literal may only specify known properties, but 'raidus' does not exist in type 'Colorful & Circle'. Did you mean to write 'radius'?2561Object literal may only specify known properties, but 'raidus' does not exist in type 'Colorful & Circle'. Did you mean to write 'radius'?draw ({color : "red",: 42 }); raidus
Interfaces vs. Intersections
We just looked at two ways to combine types which are similar, but are actually subtly different.
With interfaces, we could use an extends
clause to extend from other types, and we were able to do something similar with intersections and name the result with a type alias.
The principal difference between the two is how conflicts are handled, and that difference is typically one of the main reasons why you’d pick one over the other between an interface and a type alias of an intersection type.
If interfaces are defined with the same name, TypeScript will attempt to merge them if the properties are compatible. If the properties are not compatible (i.e., they have the same property name but different types), TypeScript will raise an error.
In the case of intersection types, properties with different types will be merged automatically. When the type is used later, TypeScript will expect the property to satisfy both types simultaneously, which may produce unexpected results.
For example, the following code will throw an error because the properties are incompatible:
ts
interface Person {name: string;}interface Person {name: number;}
In contrast, the following code will compile, but it results in a never
type:
tsTry
interfacePerson1 {name : string;}interfacePerson2 {name : number;}typeStaff =Person1 &Person2 declare conststaffer :Staff ;staffer .name ;
In this case, Staff would require the name property to be both a string and a number, which results in property being of type never
.
Generic Object Types
Let’s imagine a Box
type that can contain any value - string
s, number
s, Giraffe
s, whatever.
tsTry
interfaceBox {contents : any;}
Right now, the contents
property is typed as any
, which works, but can lead to accidents down the line.
We could instead use unknown
, but that would mean that in cases where we already know the type of contents
, we’d need to do precautionary checks, or use error-prone type assertions.
tsTry
interfaceBox {contents : unknown;}letx :Box = {contents : "hello world",};// we could check 'x.contents'if (typeofx .contents === "string") {console .log (x .contents .toLowerCase ());}// or we could use a type assertionconsole .log ((x .contents as string).toLowerCase ());
One type safe approach would be to instead scaffold out different Box
types for every type of contents
.
tsTry
interfaceNumberBox {contents : number;}interfaceStringBox {contents : string;}interfaceBooleanBox {contents : boolean;}
But that means we’ll have to create different functions, or overloads of functions, to operate on these types.
tsTry
functionsetContents (box :StringBox ,newContents : string): void;functionsetContents (box :NumberBox ,newContents : number): void;functionsetContents (box :BooleanBox ,newContents : boolean): void;functionsetContents (box : {contents : any },newContents : any) {box .contents =newContents ;}
That’s a lot of boilerplate. Moreover, we might later need to introduce new types and overloads. This is frustrating, since our box types and overloads are all effectively the same.
Instead, we can make a generic Box
type which declares a type parameter.
tsTry
interfaceBox <Type > {contents :Type ;}
You might read this as “A Box
of Type
is something whose contents
have type Type
”.
Later on, when we refer to Box
, we have to give a type argument in place of Type
.
tsTry
letbox :Box <string>;
Think of Box
as a template for a real type, where Type
is a placeholder that will get replaced with some other type.
When TypeScript sees Box<string>
, it will replace every instance of Type
in Box<Type>
with string
, and end up working with something like { contents: string }
.
In other words, Box<string>
and our earlier StringBox
work identically.
tsTry
interfaceBox <Type > {contents :Type ;}interfaceStringBox {contents : string;}letboxA :Box <string> = {contents : "hello" };boxA .contents ;letboxB :StringBox = {contents : "world" };boxB .contents ;
Box
is reusable in that Type
can be substituted with anything. That means that when we need a box for a new type, we don’t need to declare a new Box
type at all (though we certainly could if we wanted to).
tsTry
interfaceBox <Type > {contents :Type ;}interfaceApple {// ....}// Same as '{ contents: Apple }'.typeAppleBox =Box <Apple >;
This also means that we can avoid overloads entirely by instead using generic functions.
tsTry
functionsetContents <Type >(box :Box <Type >,newContents :Type ) {box .contents =newContents ;}
It is worth noting that type aliases can also be generic. We could have defined our new Box<Type>
interface, which was:
tsTry
interfaceBox <Type > {contents :Type ;}
by using a type alias instead:
tsTry
typeBox <Type > = {contents :Type ;};
Since type aliases, unlike interfaces, can describe more than just object types, we can also use them to write other kinds of generic helper types.
tsTry
typeOrNull <Type > =Type | null;typeOneOrMany <Type > =Type |Type [];typeOneOrManyOrNull <Type > =OrNull <OneOrMany <Type >>;typeOneOrManyOrNullStrings =OneOrManyOrNull <string>;
We’ll circle back to type aliases in just a little bit.
The Array
Type
Generic object types are often some sort of container type that work independently of the type of elements they contain. It’s ideal for data structures to work this way so that they’re re-usable across different data types.
It turns out we’ve been working with a type just like that throughout this handbook: the Array
type.
Whenever we write out types like number[]
or string[]
, that’s really just a shorthand for Array<number>
and Array<string>
.
tsTry
functiondoSomething (value :Array <string>) {// ...}letmyArray : string[] = ["hello", "world"];// either of these work!doSomething (myArray );doSomething (newArray ("hello", "world"));
Much like the Box
type above, Array
itself is a generic type.
tsTry
interfaceGlobal type 'Array' must have 1 type parameter(s).All declarations of 'Array' must have identical type parameters.2317< Array Type > {
2428Global type 'Array' must have 1 type parameter(s).All declarations of 'Array' must have identical type parameters./*** Gets or sets the length of the array.*/length : number;/*** Removes the last element from an array and returns it.*/pop ():Type | undefined;/*** Appends new elements to an array, and returns the new length of the array.*/A rest parameter must be of an array type.2370A rest parameter must be of an array type.push (...items :Type []): number;// ...}
Modern JavaScript also provides other data structures which are generic, like Map<K, V>
, Set<T>
, and Promise<T>
.
All this really means is that because of how Map
, Set
, and Promise
behave, they can work with any sets of types.
The ReadonlyArray
Type
The ReadonlyArray
is a special type that describes arrays that shouldn’t be changed.
tsTry
functiondoStuff (values :ReadonlyArray <string>) {// We can read from 'values'...constcopy =values .slice ();console .log (`The first value is ${values [0]}`);// ...but we can't mutate 'values'.Property 'push' does not exist on type 'readonly string[]'.2339Property 'push' does not exist on type 'readonly string[]'.values .("hello!"); push }
Much like the readonly
modifier for properties, it’s mainly a tool we can use for intent.
When we see a function that returns ReadonlyArray
s, it tells us we’re not meant to change the contents at all, and when we see a function that consumes ReadonlyArray
s, it tells us that we can pass any array into that function without worrying that it will change its contents.
Unlike Array
, there isn’t a ReadonlyArray
constructor that we can use.
tsTry
new'ReadonlyArray' only refers to a type, but is being used as a value here.2693'ReadonlyArray' only refers to a type, but is being used as a value here.("red", "green", "blue"); ReadonlyArray
Instead, we can assign regular Array
s to ReadonlyArray
s.
tsTry
constroArray :ReadonlyArray <string> = ["red", "green", "blue"];
Just as TypeScript provides a shorthand syntax for Array<Type>
with Type[]
, it also provides a shorthand syntax for ReadonlyArray<Type>
with readonly Type[]
.
tsTry
functiondoStuff (values : readonly string[]) {// We can read from 'values'...constcopy =values .slice ();console .log (`The first value is ${values [0]}`);// ...but we can't mutate 'values'.Property 'push' does not exist on type 'readonly string[]'.2339Property 'push' does not exist on type 'readonly string[]'.values .("hello!"); push }
One last thing to note is that unlike the readonly
property modifier, assignability isn’t bidirectional between regular Array
s and ReadonlyArray
s.
tsTry
letx : readonly string[] = [];lety : string[] = [];x =y ;The type 'readonly string[]' is 'readonly' and cannot be assigned to the mutable type 'string[]'.4104The type 'readonly string[]' is 'readonly' and cannot be assigned to the mutable type 'string[]'.= y x ;
Tuple Types
A tuple type is another sort of Array
type that knows exactly how many elements it contains, and exactly which types it contains at specific positions.
tsTry
typeStringNumberPair = [string, number];
Here, StringNumberPair
is a tuple type of string
and number
.
Like ReadonlyArray
, it has no representation at runtime, but is significant to TypeScript.
To the type system, StringNumberPair
describes arrays whose 0
index contains a string
and whose 1
index contains a number
.
tsTry
functiondoSomething (pair : [string, number]) {consta =pair [0];constb =pair [1];// ...}doSomething (["hello", 42]);
If we try to index past the number of elements, we’ll get an error.
tsTry
functiondoSomething (pair : [string, number]) {// ...constTuple type '[string, number]' of length '2' has no element at index '2'.2493Tuple type '[string, number]' of length '2' has no element at index '2'.c =pair [2 ];}
We can also destructure tuples using JavaScript’s array destructuring.
tsTry
functiondoSomething (stringHash : [string, number]) {const [inputString ,hash ] =stringHash ;console .log (inputString );console .log (hash );}
Tuple types are useful in heavily convention-based APIs, where each element’s meaning is “obvious”. This gives us flexibility in whatever we want to name our variables when we destructure them. In the above example, we were able to name elements
0
and1
to whatever we wanted.However, since not every user holds the same view of what’s obvious, it may be worth reconsidering whether using objects with descriptive property names may be better for your API.
Other than those length checks, simple tuple types like these are equivalent to types which are versions of Array
s that declare properties for specific indexes, and that declare length
with a numeric literal type.
tsTry
interfaceStringNumberPair {// specialized propertieslength : 2;0: string;1: number;// Other 'Array<string | number>' members...slice (start ?: number,end ?: number):Array <string | number>;}
Another thing you may be interested in is that tuples can have optional properties by writing out a question mark (?
after an element’s type).
Optional tuple elements can only come at the end, and also affect the type of length
.
tsTry
typeEither2dOr3d = [number, number, number?];functionsetCoordinate (coord :Either2dOr3d ) {const [x ,y ,z ] =coord ;console .log (`Provided coordinates had ${coord .length } dimensions`);}
Tuples can also have rest elements, which have to be an array/tuple type.
tsTry
typeStringNumberBooleans = [string, number, ...boolean[]];typeStringBooleansNumber = [string, ...boolean[], number];typeBooleansStringNumber = [...boolean[], string, number];
StringNumberBooleans
describes a tuple whose first two elements arestring
andnumber
respectively, but which may have any number ofboolean
s following.StringBooleansNumber
describes a tuple whose first element isstring
and then any number ofboolean
s and ending with anumber
.BooleansStringNumber
describes a tuple whose starting elements are any number ofboolean
s and ending with astring
then anumber
.
A tuple with a rest element has no set “length” - it only has a set of well-known elements in different positions.
tsTry
consta :StringNumberBooleans = ["hello", 1];constb :StringNumberBooleans = ["beautiful", 2, true];constc :StringNumberBooleans = ["world", 3, true, false, true, false, true];
Why might optional and rest elements be useful? Well, it allows TypeScript to correspond tuples with parameter lists. Tuples types can be used in rest parameters and arguments, so that the following:
tsTry
functionreadButtonInput (...args : [string, number, ...boolean[]]) {const [name ,version , ...input ] =args ;// ...}
is basically equivalent to:
tsTry
functionreadButtonInput (name : string,version : number, ...input : boolean[]) {// ...}
This is handy when you want to take a variable number of arguments with a rest parameter, and you need a minimum number of elements, but you don’t want to introduce intermediate variables.
readonly
Tuple Types
One final note about tuple types - tuple types have readonly
variants, and can be specified by sticking a readonly
modifier in front of them - just like with array shorthand syntax.
tsTry
functiondoSomething (pair : readonly [string, number]) {// ...}
As you might expect, writing to any property of a readonly
tuple isn’t allowed in TypeScript.
tsTry
functiondoSomething (pair : readonly [string, number]) {Cannot assign to '0' because it is a read-only property.2540Cannot assign to '0' because it is a read-only property.pair [0 ] = "hello!";}
Tuples tend to be created and left un-modified in most code, so annotating types as readonly
tuples when possible is a good default.
This is also important given that array literals with const
assertions will be inferred with readonly
tuple types.
tsTry
letpoint = [3, 4] asconst ;functiondistanceFromOrigin ([x ,y ]: [number, number]) {returnMath .sqrt (x ** 2 +y ** 2);}Argument of type 'readonly [3, 4]' is not assignable to parameter of type '[number, number]'. The type 'readonly [3, 4]' is 'readonly' and cannot be assigned to the mutable type '[number, number]'.2345Argument of type 'readonly [3, 4]' is not assignable to parameter of type '[number, number]'. The type 'readonly [3, 4]' is 'readonly' and cannot be assigned to the mutable type '[number, number]'.distanceFromOrigin (); point
Here, distanceFromOrigin
never modifies its elements, but expects a mutable tuple.
Since point
’s type was inferred as readonly [3, 4]
, it won’t be compatible with [number, number]
since that type can’t guarantee point
’s elements won’t be mutated.