fix: luxon toISODate, toISO and toSQLDate method could return null when an InvalidDate is provided

[edoardomistretta]

Please fill in this template.

• Use a meaningful title for the pull request. Include the name of the package modified.
• Add or edit tests to reflect the change.
• Follow the advice from the readme.
• Avoid common mistakes.
• Test the change in your own code. (Compile and run.)
• Run npm test luxon.

Select one of these and delete the others:

If changing an existing definition:

• Provide a URL to documentation or source code which provides context for the suggested changes: fix: toISODate, toISO and toSQLDate methods could return null when an InvalidDate is provided moment/luxon#1406
• If this PR brings the type definitions up to date with a new version of the JS library, update the version number in the header.

[typescript-bot]

@edoardomistretta Thank you for submitting this PR! I see this is your first time submitting to DefinitelyTyped 👋 — I'm the local bot who will help you through the process of getting things through.

This is a live comment which I will keep updated.

1 package in this PR

• luxon — on npm, on unpkg

Code Reviews

Because you edited one package and updated the tests (👏), I can help you merge this PR once someone else signs off on it.

You can test the changes of this PR in the Playground.

Status

• ❌ No merge conflicts
• ✅ Continuous integration tests have passed
• 🕐 Most recent commit is approved by type definition owners or DT maintainers

Once every item on this list is checked, I'll ask you for permission to merge and publish the changes.

Inactive

This PR has been inactive for 31 days — it is considered abandoned, and therefore closed!

---

Diagnostic Information: What the bot saw about this PR

{
  "type": "info",
  "now": "-",
  "pr_number": 64919,
  "author": "edoardomistretta",
  "headCommitOid": "fa8c6811f1224985be8c1e01fd3760b349170c1c",
  "mergeBaseOid": "835c3caaf83b5d72e29dfd60e9413c612dc16e2c",
  "lastPushDate": "2023-03-28T08:43:45.000Z",
  "lastActivityDate": "2023-04-03T20:20:34.000Z",
  "maintainerBlessed": "Waiting for Code Reviews",
  "hasMergeConflict": true,
  "isFirstContribution": true,
  "tooManyFiles": false,
  "hugeChange": false,
  "popularityLevel": "Critical",
  "pkgInfo": [
    {
      "name": "luxon",
      "kind": "edit",
      "files": [
        {
          "path": "types/luxon/src/datetime.d.ts",
          "kind": "definition"
        },
        {
          "path": "types/luxon/test/luxon-tests.module.ts",
          "kind": "test"
        }
      ],
      "owners": [
        "FourwingsY",
        "jsiebern",
        "mastermatt",
        "pietrovismara",
        "dawnmist",
        "ycmjason",
        "Aitor1995",
        "peterblazejewicz",
        "carsonf",
        "hugofpsilva",
        "martin-badin"
      ],
      "addedOwners": [],
      "deletedOwners": [],
      "popularityLevel": "Critical"
    }
  ],
  "reviews": [
    {
      "type": "changereq",
      "reviewer": "CarsonF",
      "date": "2023-04-03T20:20:34.000Z"
    }
  ],
  "mainBotCommentID": 1489847634,
  "ciResult": "pass"
}

[typescript-bot]

🔔 @FourwingsY @jsiebern @mastermatt @pietrovismara @dawnmist @ycmjason @Aitor1995 @peterblazejewicz @CarsonF @hugofpsilva @martin-badin — please review this PR in the next few days. Be sure to explicitly select Approve or Request Changes in the GitHub UI so I know what's going on.

[CarsonF]

#58147

[edoardomistretta]

Hi @CarsonF, this a breaking change but IMHO this is necessary.

At the moment developers are forced to know the internals of the method toX because the method could return a value that is not specified. It's like the method throws an error to catch but the developer doesn't know that the method could throw an error.

Developers are guided by types and interfaces instead of actual implementation so please consider this PR

[CarsonF]

I hear you that there's a mismatch here. Let me see if I can address this in an elegant way.

I can tell you though that this PR and your PR to luxon proper are not going to be merged.
There's are multiple dozens of methods/getters who deal with invalid input/output, not just this one.
Also the luxon jsdocs don't type any of the invalid output types, so I doubt they'll deviate with those 3 methods

[CarsonF]

Superceded by #64995

[typescript-bot]

@edoardomistretta One or more reviewers has requested changes. Please address their comments. I'll be back once they sign off or you've pushed new commits. Thank you!

[typescript-bot]

@edoardomistretta Unfortunately, this pull request currently has a merge conflict 😥. Please update your PR branch to be up-to-date with respect to master. Have a nice day!

[typescript-bot]

@edoardomistretta I haven't seen any activity on this PR in more than three weeks, and it still has problems that prevent it from being merged. The PR will be closed on May 3rd (in a week) if the issues aren't addressed.

[typescript-bot]

@edoardomistretta To keep things tidy, we have to close PRs that aren't mergeable and don't have activity in the last month. No worries, though — please open a new PR if you'd like to continue with this change. Thank you!