chore(deps): update dependency expect-type to ^0.20.0

[renovate]

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Change	Age	Confidence
expect-type	^0.15.0 → ^0.20.0

---

Release Notes

mmkal/expect-type (expect-type)

v0.20.0

Compare Source

Breaking changes

• improve overloads support, attempt 2 by @​mmkal in #​83

This change updates how overloaded functions are treated. Now, .parameters gives you a union of the parameter-tuples that a function can take. For example, given the following type:

type Factorize = {
  (input: number): number[]
  (input: bigint): bigint[]
}

Behvaiour before:

expectTypeOf<Factorize>().parameters.toEqualTypeOf<[bigint]>()

Behaviour now:

expectTypeOf<Factorize>().parameters.toEqualTypeOf<[number] | [bigint]>()

There were similar changes for .returns, .parameter(...), and .toBeCallableWith. Also, overloaded functions are now differentiated properly when using .branded.toEqualTypeOf (this was a bug that it seems nobody found).

See #​83 for more details or look at the updated docs (including a new section called "Overloaded functions", which has more info on how this behaviour differs for TypeScript versions before 5.3).

What's Changed

• Fix rendering issue in readme by @​mrazauskas in #​69
• Fix minor issues in docs by @​aryaemami59 in #​91
• create utils file by @​mmkal in #​93
• branding.ts and messages.ts by @​mmkal in #​95
• improve overloads support, attempt 2 by @​mmkal in #​83
• Extends: explain myself 1e37116
• Mark internal APIs with @internal JSDoc tag (#​104) 4c40b07
• Re-export everything in overloads.ts file (#​107) 5ee0181
• JSDoc improvements (#​100) 0bbeffa

Full Changelog: mmkal/expect-type@v0.19.0...v0.20.0

v0.19.0

Compare Source

What's Changed

• Fix .omit() to work similarly to Omit by @​aryaemami59 in #​54
• Add JSDocs to everything by @​aryaemami59 in #​56
• Remove test import in README.md by @​aryaemami59 in #​65

Full Changelog: mmkal/expect-type@0.18.0...0.19.0

v0.18.0

Compare Source

What's Changed

• Add .pick and .omit by @​aryaemami59 in #​51

New Contributors

• @​aryaemami59 made their first contribution in #​51

Full Changelog: mmkal/expect-type@v0.17.3...0.18.0

v0.17.3

Compare Source

• docs: why-is-my-assertion-failing 907b8aa
• I think the previous build was out of date somehow too, so see https://github.com/mmkal/expect-type/releases/v0.17.2

v0.17.2

Compare Source

• Improve tuple errors (#​40) 4b38117

Diff(truncated - scroll right!):

test('toEqualTypeOf with tuples', () => {
  const assertion = `expectTypeOf<[[number], [1], []]>().toEqualTypeOf<[[number], [2], []]>()`
  expect(tsErrors(assertion)).toMatchInlineSnapshot(`
-    "test/test.ts:999:999 - error TS2344: Type '[[number], [2], []]' does not satisfy the constraint '{ [x: number]: { [x: number]: number; [iterator]: (() => IterableIterator<1>) | (() => IterableIterator<number>) | (() => IterableIterator<never>); [unscopables]: (() => { copyWithin: boolean; entries: boolean; fill: boolean; find: boolean; findIndex: boolean; keys: boolean; values: boolean; }) | (() => { copyWithin: boolean; entries: boolean; fill: boolean; find: boolean; findIndex: boolean; keys: boolean; values: boolean; }) | (() => { copyWithin: boolean; entries: boolean; fill: boolean; find: boolean; findIndex: boolean; keys: boolean; values: boolean; }); length: 0 | 1; toString:  ... truncated!!!!'.
-      Types of property 'sort' are incompatible.
-        Type '(compareFn?: ((a: [] | [number] | [2], b: [] | [number] | [2]) => number) | undefined) => [[number], [2], []]' is not assignable to type '\\"Expected: function, Actual: function\\"'.
+    "test/test.ts:999:999 - error TS2344: Type '[[number], [2], []]' does not satisfy the constraint '{ 0: { 0: number; }; 1: { 0: \\"Expected: literal number: 2, Actual: literal number: 1\\"; }; 2: {}; }'.
+      The types of '1[0]' are incompatible between these types.
+        Type '2' is not assignable to type '\\"Expected: literal number: 2, Actual: literal number: 1\\"'.
    999 expectTypeOf<[[number], [1], []]>().toEqualTypeOf<[[number], [2], []]>()
                                                          ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"
  `)
})

v0.17.1

Compare Source

• disallow .not and .branded together cf38918

(this was actually documented in the v0.17.0 release but really it was only pushed here)

v0.17.0

Compare Source

#​16 went in to - hopefully - significantly improve the error messages produce on failing assertions. Here's an example of how vitest's failing tests were improved:

Before:

After:

Docs copied from the readme about how to interpret these error messages

---

Error messages

When types don't match, .toEqualTypeOf and .toMatchTypeOf use a special helper type to produce error messages that are as actionable as possible. But there's a bit of an nuance to understanding them. Since the assertions are written "fluently", the failure should be on the "expected" type, not the "actual" type (expect<Actual>().toEqualTypeOf<Expected>()). This means that type errors can be a little confusing - so this library produces a MismatchInfo type to try to make explicit what the expectation is. For example:

expectTypeOf({a: 1}).toEqualTypeOf<{a: string}>()

Is an assertion that will fail, since {a: 1} has type {a: number} and not {a: string}. The error message in this case will read something like this:

test/test.ts:999:999 - error TS2344: Type '{ a: string; }' does not satisfy the constraint '{ a: \\"Expected: string, Actual: number\\"; }'.
  Types of property 'a' are incompatible.
    Type 'string' is not assignable to type '\\"Expected: string, Actual: number\\"'.

999 expectTypeOf({a: 1}).toEqualTypeOf<{a: string}>()

Note that the type constraint reported is a human-readable messaging specifying both the "expected" and "actual" types. Rather than taking the sentence Types of property 'a' are incompatible // Type 'string' is not assignable to type "Expected: string, Actual: number" literally - just look at the property name ('a') and the message: Expected: string, Actual: number. This will tell you what's wrong, in most cases. Extremely complex types will of course be more effort to debug, and may require some experimentation. Please raise an issue if the error messages are actually misleading.

The toBe... methods (like toBeString, toBeNumber, toBeVoid etc.) fail by resolving to a non-callable type when the Actual type under test doesn't match up. For example, the failure for an assertion like expectTypeOf(1).toBeString() will look something like this:

test/test.ts:999:999 - error TS2349: This expression is not callable.
  Type 'ExpectString<number>' has no call signatures.

999 expectTypeOf(1).toBeString()
                    ~~~~~~~~~~

The This expression is not callable part isn't all that helpful - the meaningful error is the next line, Type 'ExpectString<number> has no call signatures. This essentially means you passed a number but asserted it should be a string.

If TypeScript added support for "throw" types these error messagess could be improved. Until then they will take a certain amount of squinting.

Concrete "expected" objects vs typeargs

Error messages for an assertion like this:

expectTypeOf({a: 1}).toEqualTypeOf({a: ''})

Will be less helpful than for an assertion like this:

expectTypeOf({a: 1}).toEqualTypeOf<{a: string}>()

This is because the TypeScript compiler needs to infer the typearg for the .toEqualTypeOf({a: ''}) style, and this library can only mark it as a failure by comparing it against a generic Mismatch type. So, where possible, use a typearg rather than a concrete type for .toEqualTypeOf and toMatchTypeOf. If it's much more convenient to compare two concrete types, you can use typeof:

const one = valueFromFunctionOne({some: {complex: inputs}})
const two = valueFromFunctionTwo({some: {other: inputs}})

expectTypeOf(one).toEqualTypeof<typeof two>()

---

Kinda-breaking changes: essentially none, but technically, .branded no longer returns a "full" ExpectTypeOf instance at compile-time. Previously you could do this:

expectTypeOf<{a: {b: 1} & {c: 1}}>().branded.not.toEqualTypeOf<{a: {b: 1; c: ''}}>()
expectTypeOf<{a: {b: 1} & {c: 1}}>().not.branded.toEqualTypeOf<{a: {b: 1; c: ''}}>()

Now that won't work (and it was always slightly nonsensical), so you'd have to use // @​ts-expect-error instead of not if you have a negated case where you need branded:

// @​ts-expect-error
expectTypeOf<{a: {b: 1} & {c: 1}}>().branded.not.toEqualTypeOf<{a: {b: 1; c: ''}}>()

---

What's Changed

• Improve CLI error messages by @​mmkal in #​16
• expect-type is usually a dev dependency by @​SerkanSipahi in #​39

New Contributors

• @​SerkanSipahi made their first contribution in #​39

Full Changelog: mmkal/expect-type@v0.16.0...v0.17.0

v0.16.0

Compare Source

What's Changed

• support functions with this parameters by @​mmkal and @​papb in #​15
• Prevent the .not modifier from being chained by @​trevorade in #​20
• Rewrite Equal to use the equality check from ReadonlyEquivalent exclusively by @​trevorade in #​21

Note that #​21 has affected behavior for intersection types, which can result in (arguably) false errors:

// @​ts-expect-error the following line doesn't compile, even though the types are arguably the same.
// See https://github.com/mmkal/expect-type/pull/21
expectTypeOf<{a: 1} & {b: 2}>().toEqualTypeOf<{a: 1; b: 2}>()

Full Changelog: mmkal/expect-type@v0.15.0...v16.0.0

---

Configuration

📅 Schedule: (UTC)

• Branch creation
  • At any time (no schedule defined)
• Automerge
  • At any time (no schedule defined)

🚦 Automerge: Enabled.

♻ Rebasing: Whenever PR is behind base branch, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

🔕 Ignore: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again.

---

• If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

---

This PR was generated by Mend Renovate. View the repository job log.

[renovate]

⚠️ Artifact update problem

Renovate failed to update an artifact related to this branch. You probably do not want to merge this PR as-is.

♻ Renovate will retry this branch, including artifacts, only when one of the following happens:

• any of the package files in this branch needs updating, or
• the branch becomes conflicted, or
• you click the rebase/retry checkbox if found above, or
• you rename this PR's title to start with "rebase!" to trigger it manually

The artifact failure details are included below:

File name: pnpm-lock.yaml

Scope: all 9 workspace projects
Progress: resolved 1, reused 0, downloaded 0, added 0
Progress: resolved 17, reused 0, downloaded 0, added 0
[WARN] The metadata of @types/node is missing the "time" field; skipping the minimumReleaseAge check for this package.
Progress: resolved 25, reused 0, downloaded 0, added 0
Progress: resolved 42, reused 0, downloaded 0, added 0
Progress: resolved 47, reused 0, downloaded 0, added 0
Progress: resolved 48, reused 0, downloaded 0, added 0
Progress: resolved 49, reused 0, downloaded 0, added 0
Progress: resolved 50, reused 0, downloaded 0, added 0
Progress: resolved 80, reused 0, downloaded 0, added 0
Progress: resolved 118, reused 0, downloaded 0, added 0
Progress: resolved 153, reused 0, downloaded 0, added 0
Progress: resolved 170, reused 0, downloaded 0, added 0
Progress: resolved 188, reused 0, downloaded 0, added 0
Progress: resolved 233, reused 0, downloaded 0, added 0
Progress: resolved 253, reused 0, downloaded 0, added 0
Progress: resolved 270, reused 0, downloaded 0, added 0
Progress: resolved 284, reused 0, downloaded 0, added 0
Progress: resolved 288, reused 0, downloaded 0, added 0
/tmp/renovate/repos/github/stalniy/casl/packages/casl-angular:
[ERR_PNPM_MISSING_TIME] The metadata of @jest/pattern is missing the "time" field

This error happened while installing the dependencies of jest@30.3.0
 at @jest/core@30.3.0

If you cannot fix this registry issue, then set "resolution-mode" to "highest".