Conversation
Contributor
Author
|
@typescript-bot perf test |
Collaborator
|
Heya @rbuckton, I've started to run the perf test suite on this PR at 8eba362. You can monitor the build here. Update: The results are in! |
Collaborator
Collaborator
Collaborator
Collaborator
|
The user suite test run you requested has finished and failed. I've opened a PR with the baseline diff from master. |
Collaborator
|
@rbuckton Here they are:Comparison Report - master..39393
System
Hosts
Scenarios
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
weswigham
approved these changes
Jul 3, 2020
Contributor
Author
|
I noticed some failures in the DT test run. I'm trying to determine if these are existing errors or are due to this change. |
Contributor
Author
|
It looks like the DT failures are issues in DT:
|
Closed
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In #30779 we added the ability to relate a source type to a target when the target is a discriminated union and the source is covered by the target. This did not work when the target was a union of tuple types as the relationship check would fail when comparing the synthesized index types for each tuple in
indexTypesRelatedTo. This was further complicated by the fact that the new variadic tuple type logic added topropertiesRelatedTofails to exclude relationship checks for non-variable elements whose indices are included in theexcludedPropertiesmap.This PR does two things to address these issues:
propertiesRelatedToso that it aligns with the existing, non-tuple-specific logic.indexTypesRelatedTocheck when both the source type and the target type are tuples, as the index type check should be sufficiently covered by the tuple-specific branch inpropertiesRelatedTo.Alternatively, rather than skipping the
indexTypesRelatedTocheck, we could synthesize a copy of the source and target tuple types with the excluded discriminants erased toneverso that they are excluded from the index type. That would result in the allocation of types purely to accommodateindexTypesRelatedTo, which would then be subsequently discarded. This seems like an unnecessary cost, aspropertiesRelatedTosufficiently covers the numeric index type case.Fixes #39357
Fixes #34967