Issues with extending ObjectConstructor interface #3889

Activity

1. qc00 commented on Jul 16, 2015

   

   Qi (qc00)

   on Jul 16, 2015

   More actions

   This is due to some limitations in definition merging where interfaces declared in d.ts files do not merge with "normal" ones declared in .ts code.

   Your example would have worked if you could say

   declare interface ObjectConstructor {
       assign(target: any, ...sources: any[]): any;
   }
   

   but you can't do declare on interface.

   The only solution is to move the interface bit into its own .d.ts and ///<referece it from your code.
2. mhegazy commented on Jul 16, 2015

   

   Mohamed Hegazy (mhegazy)

   on Jul 16, 2015

   Contributor

   More actions

   @billccn interfaces always merge, even accross files. there is no such limitation. looks like you are talking about interfaces defined within a module, since modules have thier own scope, and interface with the same name as one in the global scope will not merge..

   e.g.:

   // global.d.ts
   interface I {
       a: string
   }
   
   
   // myModule.ts
   import d from "anotherModule";
   
   // This I is local to myModule and does not merge with the global"
   interface I {
       b: number;
   }
3. mhegazy commented on Jul 16, 2015

   

   Mohamed Hegazy (mhegazy)

   on Jul 16, 2015

   Contributor

   More actions

   Kitson Kelly (@kitsonk) the sample you provided works fine for me on latest. can you provide more details?
4. Mohamed Hegazy (mhegazy)

   added

   Needs More InfoThe issue still hasn't been fully clarifiedThe issue still hasn't been fully clarified

   on Jul 16, 2015
5. kitsonk commented on Jul 16, 2015

   

   Kitson Kelly (kitsonk)

   on Jul 16, 2015

   ContributorAuthor

   More actions

   Ok, I tried several different variations because I got it "working" accidentally and I realise the problem. Now I don't know if it is as designed or not (it is very confusing from a developer though).

   The following works:

   interface ObjectConstructor {
       assign(target: any, ...sources: any[]): any;
   }
   
   let assign = Object.assign ? Object.assign : function(target: any, ...sources: any[]): any {};
   
   function test () {};

   The following gives Property 'assign' does not exist on type 'ObjectConstructor':

   interface ObjectConstructor {
       assign(target: any, ...sources: any[]): any;
   }
   
   let assign = Object.assign ? Object.assign : function(target: any, ...sources: any[]): any {};
   
   export function test () {};

   Obviously it has to do with modules and namespacing, but I will admit I am confused.
6. RyanCavanaugh commented on Jul 16, 2015

   

   Ryan Cavanaugh (RyanCavanaugh)

   on Jul 16, 2015

   Member

   More actions

   When you have a top-level export, your file is a module, which means all declarations are introduced at the module scope rather than the global scope. This means that interface ObjectConstructor declares a new type ObjectConstructor (at the module scope) rather than merging with the ObjectConstructor type from the global scope.

   This is intentional because otherwise there wouldn't be any way to make a new interface local to your module that had the same name as a global type.

   👍React with 👍2Reacted by Huan Li and Ishan Jain
7. kitsonk commented on Jul 16, 2015

   

   Kitson Kelly (kitsonk)

   on Jul 16, 2015

   ContributorAuthor

   More actions

   Thanks. I figured it was intentional, but obviously it is rather confusing, especially when not having a "choice" about accessing globally scoped namespaces at the implementation level. I assume there are no language semantics to denote that I am referring to the global namespace? Therefore, the only way to extend it is as @billccn suggests (and Mohamed Hegazy (@mhegazy) implies) by declaring in a non-module, like a project .d.ts.
8. RyanCavanaugh commented on Jul 16, 2015

   

   Ryan Cavanaugh (RyanCavanaugh)

   on Jul 16, 2015

   Member

   More actions

   Correct. Some related discussion in #3857 and #983
9. bryanforbes commented on Jul 16, 2015

   

   Bryan Forbes (bryanforbes)

   on Jul 16, 2015

   Contributor

   More actions

   Kitson Kelly (@kitsonk) Given what Ryan Cavanaugh (@RyanCavanaugh) explained, could you do something like this?

   interface ObjectCtor extends ObjectConstructor {
       assign(target: any, ...sources: any[]): any;
   }
   declare var Object: ObjectCtor;
   export let assign = Object.assign ? Object.assign : function(target: any, ...sources: any[]): any {
           return;
   };
10. kitsonk commented on Jul 16, 2015

    

    Kitson Kelly (kitsonk)

    on Jul 16, 2015

    ContributorAuthor

    More actions

    Bryan Forbes (@bryanforbes) thanks for the effective workaround. #983 being re-opened would also address the "limitation" I am perceiving so I will close in lieu of that.
11. Kitson Kelly (kitsonk)

    closed this as completedon Jul 16, 2015
12. tomitrescak commented on Aug 23, 2016

    

    Tomas Trescak (tomitrescak)

    on Aug 23, 2016

    Last edited by tomitrescak

    More actions

    Guys, sorry to comment in this zombie thread but there is weird stuff happening.
    Declaring a following definition file does nothing and typescript does not recognise the polyfill:

    // file polyfills.d.ts
    declare interface ObjectContructor {
      assign(target: any, ...sources: any[]): any;
    }

    but declaring it inside global, using module augmentation works

    // polyfill.ts
    
    declare global {
      export interface ObjectContructor {
        assign(target: any, ...sources: any[]): any;
      }
    }
    
    Object.assign = ...

    Any idea why this is?
13. mhegazy commented on Aug 24, 2016

    

    Mohamed Hegazy (mhegazy)

    on Aug 24, 2016

    Contributor

    More actions

    i would assume that the file polyfills.d.ts has a top level import or export, this turns it into a module. modules have their own scope, an this this ObjectConstructor is not really the ObjectConstructor but rather a local interface with the same name that shadows the global declaration.

    using the declare global syntax, you are bypassing the scoping of the module and placing the declaration explicitly in the global scope, and this it merges with the intended ObjectConstructor declaration and you get the desired behavior.
14. microsoft

    locked and limited conversation to collaborators on Jun 19, 2018