Before giving up I wanted to give it a shot here.
I have a definition file with typings like the following:
/**
* My json decode function, in reality very different
* implementation (class like) but it works as an example
*/
function decodeJSON<T = unknown>(str: string): T;
If I wanted to use this generic in TypeScript I would do something like
the following
const value = decodeJSON<number[]>("[1,2,3]"); // return type will be number[]
However in my actual code I can't use TypeScript, only it's typings for development purposes, and I can't seem to find a way to tell my editor what the type I'm passing to the generic parameter is so that I get the correct type information.
I've tried to use JSDoc to specify what the parameter for the generic might be the same way that TypeScript can
// I was expecting JSDoc to understand something like this, but it doesn't
/** @type {decodeJSON<number[]>} */
const value = decodeJSON("[1,2,3]"); // Type inference will be unknown
But it doesn't work. I don't really care what the result might be in runtime, I have sanity checks for that already implemented. I just want my editor to give me type hints about the generic function result to make my job (this function has some heavy use in my app) easier
My editor is WebStorm in case it matters, but this seems to be a general limitation of JSDoc
与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…