Type Void[] Array Not Assignable to Type Void

Question

I expect type void[] to be compatible with type void. Specifically, when using Promise.all.

class Foo {
  delete(): Promise<void> {
    // do delete
    return Promise.resolve();
  }
  deleteMany(list: Foo[]): Promise<void> {
    return Promise.all(list.map((x) => x.delete()));
  }

typescript error:

'Type 'Promise<void[]>' is not assignable to type 'Promise<void>'. Type 'void[]' is not assignable to type 'void'.'

I can solve this two ways that I know of:

Mark deleteMany as returning Promise<void[]>.

Promise chain to Promise.all, to return a resolved promise. e.g.

return Promise.all(list.map((x) => x.delete())).then(() => Promise.resolve());

The second one is worse, since that bit of code executes in JavaScript, but the first one is confusing to developers. Does Typescript have poor support for Promise.all or is it omitted from their documentation? Anyone find a better solution?

Why not just mark deleteMany as returning Promise<void[]>? That's not poor support, that's what a Promise.all call returns... — Heretic Monkey
– Heretic Monkey, Commented Apr 24, 2017 at 20:56
As @MikeMcCaughan suggests.. I agree.. Promise.all returns a Promise of array of the type, which in this case it is void — radix
– radix, Commented Apr 24, 2017 at 20:57
3rd option: Just leave the return type off entirely. The compiler will infer it and raise an error if it is used incorrectly. Go with 1 or 3, 2 does not make sense. — Aluan Haddad
– Aluan Haddad, Commented Apr 24, 2017 at 21:11
From the MDN docs: "If all of the passed-in promises fulfill, Promise.all is fulfilled with an array of the values from the passed-in promises, in the same order as defined in the iterable." This is the expected result of Promise.all -- a promise that resolves to an array containing the fulfilled values which in this case will all be void. It would be confusing to developers to type it with anything BUT Promise<void[]> — sbking
– sbking, Commented Apr 24, 2017 at 21:34
@MikeMcCaughan Because consumers shouldn't care about implementation detail. I like Aluan's suggestion the best. sbking You're absolutely right, however, I find arrays filled with void types terribly unhelpful. — Jerroyd M.
– Jerroyd M., Commented Apr 27, 2017 at 21:04

Erik Cupal · Accepted Answer · 2017-04-24 21:27:16Z

8

The 1 (Mark deleteMany as returning Promise<void[]>) is absolutely ok at least for me.

However, you can use async/await if you really want to return Promise<void>:

class Foo {
  delete(): Promise<void> {
    // do delete
    return Promise.resolve();
  }
  async deleteMany(list: Foo[]): Promise<void> {
    await Promise.all(list.map((x) => x.delete()));
  }

The function will behave exactly the same way.

answered Apr 24, 2017 at 21:27

Erik Cupal

2,9451 gold badge21 silver badges20 bronze badges

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

Comments

artem · Accepted Answer · 2017-04-24 21:34:40Z

4

void is incompatible with any other type except null and undefined by design, so it's incompatible with void[].

You could use Promise<{}> as result type of deleteMany, that is, promise resolving to empty object. It works, because empty object type has no properties (so it can not meaningfully be used in any way), and, because it has no properties (again), it could be assigned almost anything, including void[]:

class Foo {
    delete(): Promise<void> {
        // do delete
        return Promise.resolve();
    }
    deleteMany(list: Foo[]): Promise<{}> {
        return Promise.all(list.map((x) => x.delete()));
    }
}

answered Apr 24, 2017 at 21:34

artem

52.3k10 gold badges87 silver badges85 bronze badges

Comments

Steve B · Accepted Answer · 2022-11-22 08:12:34Z

0

Since the promise doesn't actually contains data, you can safely cast like this:

class Foo {
  delete(): Promise<void> {
    // do delete
    return Promise.resolve();
  }
  deleteMany(list: Foo[]): Promise<void> {
    return (Promise.all(list.map((x) => x.delete()))) as unknown as Promise<void>;
  }
}

The intermediate unknown can trick the TS compiler to allow casting

answered Nov 22, 2022 at 8:12

Steve B

38k24 gold badges110 silver badges187 bronze badges

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Type Void[] Array Not Assignable to Type Void

3 Answers 3

Comments

Comments

Comments

Your Answer

Hot Network Questions

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

3 Answers 3

Comments

Comments

Comments

Your Answer

Sign up or log in

Post as a guest

Related