Error on static class members named 'constructor' should be consistent

[ark120202]

TypeScript Version: 3.7.0-dev.20190831

Search Terms: class, constructor, static, computed, quoted

Code

class A { static constructor() {} }
class B { static "constructor"() {} }
class C { static ["constructor"]() {} }

Expected behavior:

Even though it may be confused with non-standard extensions like #265, I think treating all cases equally would be less confusing, because unlike non-static ["constructor"] there is no difference at runtime.

Actual behavior:

A and B (with #31949) get a 'static' modifier cannot appear on a constructor declaration. diagnostic.

Playground Link:
http://www.typescriptlang.org/play/#code/MYGwhgzhAECC0G9oQC5hQS2NYB7AdqgE4CuwKuRAFAJSIC+09AUKJDAEKLJqbYBEeQilLlK-WgyatwUaAGFuqdFmgBtQQWJkKRfgF1JCRiyA

Related Issues: #31020, eslint/eslint#12110

[sandersn]

I don't understand your expected behaviour here. Do you expect an error on all 3 or no errors at all?

As far as I understand, none of these 3 examples declares an actual constructor. Am I correct on that?

[ark120202]

I don't understand your expected behaviour here. Do you expect an error on all 3 or no errors at all?

I think anything consistent would be fine. I personally prefer no errors, since, even if it's a bit confusing, all 3 cases are valid JS and disallowing confusing code better fits linter.

As far as I understand, none of these 3 examples declares an actual constructor. Am I correct on that?

Yes, all these 3 cases are equivalent to Class.constructor = function() {}.