Skip to content
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 6 additions & 0 deletions lib/rules/prop-types.js
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -917,6 +917,12 @@ module.exports = {
}
},

TypeParameterInstantiation: function(node) {
if (node.params && node.params[0].type === 'GenericTypeAnnotation' && node.params[0].id.name === 'Props') {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It would be best not to check for the type name here in case people want to pass in a type with a different name, eg:

type FancyPropsType = {
   ...
}

class Bar extends React.Component<FancyPropsType> { }

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In fact, it would be great to add that as a unit test to ensure it is supported.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

good call; this definitely should be supported.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@jseminck jseminck Aug 17, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That makes sense.

But what about this test case that we have. Is that still valid? I suppose not, as now we are passing void for Props and { person: Person } as State ? What was the third parameter?

type Person = {
  firstname: string
};
class Hello extends React.Component<void, { person: Person }, void> {
  render () {
    return <div>Hello {this.props.person.lastname}</div>;
  }
}

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

the third might be context

markPropTypesAsDeclared(node, resolveTypeAnnotation(node.params[0]));
}
},

VariableDeclarator: function(node) {
const destructuring = node.init && node.id && node.id.type === 'ObjectPattern';
// let {props: {firstname}} = this
Expand Down
33 changes: 33 additions & 0 deletions tests/lib/rules/prop-types.js
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -1558,6 +1558,20 @@ ruleTester.run('prop-types', rule, {
].join('\n'),
parser: 'babel-eslint'
},
{
code: `
type Props = {
foo: string,
};

class Bar extends React.Component<Props> {
render() {
return <div>{this.props.foo}</div>
}
}
`,
parser: 'babel-eslint'
},
// issue #1288
`function Foo() {
const props = {}
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -2928,6 +2942,25 @@ ruleTester.run('prop-types', rule, {
type: 'Identifier'
}],
parser: 'babel-eslint'
}, {
code: `
type Props = {
foo: string,
};

class Bar extends React.Component<Props> {
render() {
return <div>{this.props.bar}</div>
}
}
`,
errors: [{
message: '\'bar\' is missing in props validation',
line: 8,
column: 37,
type: 'Identifier'
}],
parser: 'babel-eslint'
}
]
});