equals and union type

[wclr]

type Union = 'one' | 'two' | 'tree'

const fn = (union: Union) => {
  union === 'four'
  R.equals('four')(union)
  R.equals('four', union)
  R.propEq('prop', 'four', { prop: union }) 
}

What do you think, should/can equals error on this?

[KiaraGrouwstra]

I'm with you, though this is a TS thing, rather than one on Ramda typings.
I actually made a PR at TS arguing exactly this, though the TS team saw things differently. If you have a good use-case, please tell them about it.

[wclr]

Well I believe this one is a valid case =)

[KiaraGrouwstra]

Whoops, I'm wrong, that issue was specifically about generics. I vaguely recall another issue about this more general case, but no clue where it was...

[KiaraGrouwstra]

Uhh, not sure if there is an issue for this there, so feel free to create one. Fortunately it's an easy change (just widen the types where I currently did getApparentType here) -- the question is mainly where they'd want it.

Given that change, I imagine my PR might gain more utility as well. I'm not fully awake yet, but in the present logic (not resolving generics) I'm not sure atm how it allows comparing say a literal (e.g. 0) and a generic (bound to e.g. number), though that should be fine. .. Then again I don't recall it actually being that picky currently. Hm.