Image JSX type

[Netail]

Extension Version

0.20260520.1

VS Code Version

1.120.0

Operating system Version

MacOS 26.5

Steps to reproduce

1. In JSX use <Image /> without any imports for such component
2. Look up the type it uses

Issue

It seems to pull a non JSX element type from /Users/me/.vscode/extensions/typescriptteam.native-preview-0.20260520.1-darwin-arm64/lib/lib.dom.d.ts;

declare var Image: {
    new(width?: number, height?: number): HTMLImageElement;
};

which should not be allowed to be JSX element as it's an HTMLImageElement constructor

[RyanCavanaugh]

This is an error under ts-check. I'm not sure what else you want to happen here -- "should not be allowed" means what?

[Netail]

This is an error under ts-check. I'm not sure what else you want to happen here -- "should not be allowed" means what?

It's a bit weird that the type is being assigned to a JSX element as the type itself is not related to a JSX element. I think that such types shouldn't be attachted to JSX elements? It gave a false impression as if I had a custom element imported named Image or a react Image element existed.

I believe this wasn't the case in OG typescript? (At least never noticed)

[nmain]

I think that such types shouldn't be attachted to JSX elements?

At transform time, this

var x = <Image />;

will be transformed into this (*)

var x = h(Image);

At runtime, that will then pass whatever Image is, looked up in the current scope, to the h function. So Typescript is correct here in saying that if you have <Image />, whatever Image represents, in whatever active scope, will be used.

Whether that's type-legal depends on what's in your namespace JSX { ... }. If you want to, you could write your own JSX lib in which <Image /> makes sense. If you're using React or something similar, it is a type error.

* - The exact transform depends on settings, but the same idea holds regardless.

[RyanCavanaugh]

I'm still not sure what you want to happen here. You want go-to-definition to just not work? What if Image was a value that you thought should be a valid JSX element and you wanted to investigate why it wasn't working?

[Netail]

I'm still not sure what you want to happen here. You want go-to-definition to just not work? What if Image was a value that you thought should be a valid JSX element and you wanted to investigate why it wasn't working?

Throw something like "Unknown element" when Image is used as a JSX element & no custom Image component is imported

[Netail]

Whether that's type-legal depends on what's in your namespace JSX { ... }. If you want to, you could write your own JSX lib in which makes sense. If you're using React or something similar, it is a type error.

So from what I understand, if we use the react types (which we do already), it should throw something like "unknown element" instead of being resolved as react types defines a JSX namespace?

[RyanCavanaugh]

Throw something like "Unknown element"

What does "throw" mean?

[Netail]

nvm, same behaviour as pre-tsgo