Fix: keep type information for nullable fields when possible #1524
Conversation
This file contains 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
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: fe6c6d1 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
WickyNilliams
changed the title
|
@davidleger95 i'd be interested in your thoughts, since this is a refinement of your PR |
|
I’m OK with this change! Would welcome @davidleger95’s thoughts async on this as well, but I also think this is an improvement (I wouldn’t consider changes to |
drwpow
approved these changes
Feb 3, 2024
|
Appreciate it! Can probably close #1407 as fixed now? |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Changes
The PR #1468 was too aggressive in its use of
unknownfor nullable fields. It makes sense to useunknownwhen there is notypedefined in the schema. But in cases where there is type information available, we should not discard it.The changes in the snapshots show that richer types are preserved when possible. I wrote a comment on the original PR relating to this, but it's possible it got missed.
Essentially, we use the "old" behavior where we have some type info available in the schema, and the "new" behavior otherwise. The original bug report #1407 says (emphasis mine):
This PR ensures the "has no type information" part is respected.
How to Review
The snapshots and tests should give enough context to evaluate the PR, and hopefully my justification makes sense.
Checklist
docs/updated (if necessary)pnpm run update:examplesrun (only applicable for openapi-typescript)