In Angular 2 templates safe operator ?.
works, but not in component.ts
using TypeScript 2.0. Also, safe navigation operator (!.
) doesn't work.
For example:
This TypeScript
if (a!.b!.c) { }
compiles to this JavaScript
if (a.b.c) { }
But when I run it, I get the follow error:
Cannot read property 'b' of undefined
Is there any alternative to the following?
if (a && a.b && a.b.c) { }
!
is non-null assertion operator (post-fix expression) - it just saying to type checker that you're sure that a
is not null
or undefined
.
the operation a! produces a value of the type of a with null and undefined excluded
Optional chaining finally made it to typescript (3.7) 🎉
The optional chaining operator ?. permits reading the value of a property located deep within a chain of connected objects without having to expressly validate that each reference in the chain is valid. The ?. operator functions similarly to the . chaining operator, except that instead of causing an error if a reference is nullish (null or undefined), the expression short-circuits with a return value of undefined. When used with function calls, it returns undefined if the given function does not exist.
Syntax:
obj?.prop // Accessing object's property
obj?.[expr] // Optional chaining with expressions
arr?.[index] // Array item access with optional chaining
func?.(args) // Optional chaining with function calls
Pay attention:
Optional chaining is not valid on the left-hand side of an assignment
const object = {};
object?.property = 1; // Uncaught SyntaxError: Invalid left-hand side in assignment
Since TypeScript 3.7 was released you can use optional chaining now.
Property example:
let x = foo?.bar.baz();
This is equvalent to:
let x = (foo === null || foo === undefined)
? undefined
: foo.bar.baz();
Moreover you can call:
Optional Call
function(otherFn: (par: string) => void) {
otherFn?.("some value");
}
otherFn
will be called only if otherFn
won't be equal to null
or undefined
Usage optional chaining in IF statement
This:
if (someObj && someObj.someProperty) {
// ...
}
can be replaced now with this
if (someObj?.someProperty) {
// ...
}
Ref: https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/release-notes/typescript-3-7.html
!
instead of ?
in "typescript": "~3.5.3"
?.
) was introduced in 3.7 and you're running 3.5.3. In versions earlier than 3.7, TypeScript assumes that ?
is being used in the shorthand if form (foo ? bar : baz
) and so expects the rest of the expression
Update:
Planned in the scope of 3.7 release
https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/33352
You can try to write a custom function like that.
The main advantage of the approach is a type-checking and partial intellisense.
export function nullSafe<T,
K0 extends keyof T,
K1 extends keyof T[K0],
K2 extends keyof T[K0][K1],
K3 extends keyof T[K0][K1][K2],
K4 extends keyof T[K0][K1][K2][K3],
K5 extends keyof T[K0][K1][K2][K3][K4]>
(obj: T, k0: K0, k1?: K1, k2?: K2, k3?: K3, k4?: K4, k5?: K5) {
let result: any = obj;
const keysCount = arguments.length - 1;
for (var i = 1; i <= keysCount; i++) {
if (result === null || result === undefined) return result;
result = result[arguments[i]];
}
return result;
}
And usage (supports up to 5 parameters and can be extended):
nullSafe(a, 'b', 'c');
Example on playground.
Another alternative that uses an external library is _.has() from Lodash.
E.g.
_.has(a, 'b.c')
is equal to
(a && a.b && a.b.c)
EDIT: As noted in the comments, you lose out on Typescript's type inference when using this method. E.g. Assuming that one's objects are properly typed, one would get a compilation error with (a && a.b && a.b.z) if z is not defined as a field of object b. But using _.has(a, 'b.z'), one would not get that error.
A new library called ts-optchain provides this functionality, and unlike lodash' solution, it also keeps your types safe, here is a sample of how it is used (taken from the readme):
import { oc } from 'ts-optchain';
interface I {
a?: string;
b?: {
d?: string;
};
c?: Array<{
u?: {
v?: number;
};
}>;
e?: {
f?: string;
g?: () => string;
};
}
const x: I = {
a: 'hello',
b: {
d: 'world',
},
c: [{ u: { v: -100 } }, { u: { v: 200 } }, {}, { u: { v: -300 } }],
};
// Here are a few examples of deep object traversal using (a) optional chaining vs
// (b) logic expressions. Each of the following pairs are equivalent in
// result. Note how the benefits of optional chaining accrue with
// the depth and complexity of the traversal.
oc(x).a(); // 'hello'
x.a;
oc(x).b.d(); // 'world'
x.b && x.b.d;
oc(x).c[0].u.v(); // -100
x.c && x.c[0] && x.c[0].u && x.c[0].u.v;
oc(x).c[100].u.v(); // undefined
x.c && x.c[100] && x.c[100].u && x.c[100].u.v;
oc(x).c[100].u.v(1234); // 1234
(x.c && x.c[100] && x.c[100].u && x.c[100].u.v) || 1234;
oc(x).e.f(); // undefined
x.e && x.e.f;
oc(x).e.f('optional default value'); // 'optional default value'
(x.e && x.e.f) || 'optional default value';
// NOTE: working with function value types can be risky. Additional run-time
// checks to verify that object types are functions before invocation are advised!
oc(x).e.g(() => 'Yo Yo')(); // 'Yo Yo'
((x.e && x.e.g) || (() => 'Yo Yo'))();
Building on @Pvl's answer, you can include type safety on your returned value as well if you use overrides:
function dig<
T,
K1 extends keyof T
>(obj: T, key1: K1): T[K1];
function dig<
T,
K1 extends keyof T,
K2 extends keyof T[K1]
>(obj: T, key1: K1, key2: K2): T[K1][K2];
function dig<
T,
K1 extends keyof T,
K2 extends keyof T[K1],
K3 extends keyof T[K1][K2]
>(obj: T, key1: K1, key2: K2, key3: K3): T[K1][K2][K3];
function dig<
T,
K1 extends keyof T,
K2 extends keyof T[K1],
K3 extends keyof T[K1][K2],
K4 extends keyof T[K1][K2][K3]
>(obj: T, key1: K1, key2: K2, key3: K3, key4: K4): T[K1][K2][K3][K4];
function dig<
T,
K1 extends keyof T,
K2 extends keyof T[K1],
K3 extends keyof T[K1][K2],
K4 extends keyof T[K1][K2][K3],
K5 extends keyof T[K1][K2][K3][K4]
>(obj: T, key1: K1, key2: K2, key3: K3, key4: K4, key5: K5): T[K1][K2][K3][K4][K5];
function dig<
T,
K1 extends keyof T,
K2 extends keyof T[K1],
K3 extends keyof T[K1][K2],
K4 extends keyof T[K1][K2][K3],
K5 extends keyof T[K1][K2][K3][K4]
>(obj: T, key1: K1, key2?: K2, key3?: K3, key4?: K4, key5?: K5):
T[K1] |
T[K1][K2] |
T[K1][K2][K3] |
T[K1][K2][K3][K4] |
T[K1][K2][K3][K4][K5] {
let value: any = obj && obj[key1];
if (key2) {
value = value && value[key2];
}
if (key3) {
value = value && value[key3];
}
if (key4) {
value = value && value[key4];
}
if (key5) {
value = value && value[key5];
}
return value;
}
Example on playground.
Versions above typescript 3.7 supports safe navigation operator for typescript < 3.7 I made this function which can be useful.
export function isAccessible(data, keys, start=0) {
if (start == 0 && (data == null || data == undefined)) {
console.warn("data",data);
return false;
} else {
if (data[keys[start]] == null || data[keys[start]] == undefined) {
console.warn("Object valid till", keys.slice(0,start),keys[start],"undefined");
return false;
} else {
if (start + 1 >= keys.length) {
return data[keys[start]];
}
return this.isAccessible(data[keys[start]], keys, start + 1);
}
}
}
function call in code
Suppose we have a Object obj
keys of which can vary and we want to check if obj.key1.key2
is accessible or not then function call will be as follows:
isAccessible(Object,["key1","key2"])
Success story sharing