translate "Checks For Equality on NaN" in ko

[bumkeyy]

No description provided.

[github-actions]

Thanks for the PR!

This section of the codebase is owned by @bumkeyy, @yeonjuan, @guyeol, and @dvlprsh - if they write a comment saying "LGTM" then it will be merged.

[github-actions]

Translation of TypeScript 4.9.md

---

title: TypeScript 4.9
layout: docs
permalink: /ko/docs/handbook/release-notes/typescript-4-9.html

oneline: TypeScript 4.9 Release Notes

The satisfies Operator

TypeScript developers are often faced with a dilemma: we want to ensure that some expression matches some type, but also want to keep the most specific type of that expression for inference purposes.

For example:

// Each property can be a string or an RGB tuple.
const palette = {
    red: [255, 0, 0],
    green: "#00ff00",
    bleu: [0, 0, 255]
//  ^^^^ sacrebleu - we've made a typo!
};

// We want to be able to use array methods on 'red'...
const redComponent = palette.red.at(0);

// or string methods on 'green'...
const greenNormalized = palette.green.toUpperCase();

Notice that we've written bleu, whereas we probably should have written blue.
We could try to catch that bleu typo by using a type annotation on palette, but we'd lose the information about each property.

type Colors = "red" | "green" | "blue";

type RGB = [red: number, green: number, blue: number];

const palette: Record<Colors, string | RGB> = {
    red: [255, 0, 0],
    green: "#00ff00",
    bleu: [0, 0, 255]
//  ~~~~ The typo is now correctly detected
};

// But we now have an undesirable error here - 'palette.red' "could" be a string.
const redComponent = palette.red.at(0);

The new satisfies operator lets us validate that the type of an expression matches some type, without changing the resulting type of that expression.
As an example, we could use satisfies to validate that all the properties of palette are compatible with string | number[]:

type Colors = "red" | "green" | "blue";

type RGB = [red: number, green: number, blue: number];

const palette = {
    red: [255, 0, 0],
    green: "#00ff00",
    bleu: [0, 0, 255]
//  ~~~~ The typo is now caught!
} satisfies Record<Colors, string | RGB>;

// Both of these methods are still accessible!
const redComponent = palette.red.at(0);
const greenNormalized = palette.green.toUpperCase();

satisfies can be used to catch lots of possible errors.
For example, we could ensure that an object has all the keys of some type, but no more:

type Colors = "red" | "green" | "blue";

// Ensure that we have exactly the keys from 'Colors'.
const favoriteColors = {
    "red": "yes",
    "green": false,
    "blue": "kinda",
    "platypus": false
//  ~~~~~~~~~~ error - "platypus" was never listed in 'Colors'.
} satisfies Record<Colors, unknown>;

// All the information about the 'red', 'green', and 'blue' properties are retained.
const g: boolean = favoriteColors.green;

Maybe we don't care about if the property names match up somehow, but we do care about the types of each property.
In that case, we can also ensure that all of an object's property values conform to some type.

type RGB = [red: number, green: number, blue: number];

const palette = {
    red: [255, 0, 0],
    green: "#00ff00",
    blue: [0, 0]
    //    ~~~~~~ error!
} satisfies Record<string, string | RGB>;

// Information about each property is still maintained.
const redComponent = palette.red.at(0);
const greenNormalized = palette.green.toUpperCase();

For more examples, you can see the issue proposing this and the implementing pull request.
We'd like to thank Oleksandr Tarasiuk who implemented and iterated on this feature with us.

Unlisted Property Narrowing with the in Operator

As developers, we often need to deal with values that aren't fully known at runtime.
In fact, we often don't know if properties exist, whether we're getting a response from a server or reading a configuration file.
JavaScript's in operator can check whether a property
exists on an object.

Previously, TypeScript allowed us to narrow away any types that don't explicitly list a property.

interface RGB {
    red: number;
    green: number;
    blue: number;
}

interface HSV {
    hue: number;
    saturation: number;
    value: number;
}

function setColor(color: RGB | HSV) {
    if ("hue" in color) {
        // 'color' now has the type HSV
    }
    // ...
}

Here, the type RGB didn't list the hue and got narrowed away, and leaving us with the type HSV.

But what about examples where no type listed a given property?
In those cases, the language didn't help us much.
Let's take the following example in JavaScript:

function tryGetPackageName(context) {
    const packageJSON = context.packageJSON;
    // Check to see if we have an object.
    if (packageJSON && typeof packageJSON === "object") {
        // Check to see if it has a string name property.
        if ("name" in packageJSON && typeof packageJSON.name === "string") {
            return packageJSON.name;
        }
    }

    return undefined;
}

Rewriting this to canonical TypeScript would just be a matter of defining and using a type for context;
however, picking a safe type like unknown for the packageJSON property would cause issues in older versions of TypeScript.

interface Context {
    packageJSON: unknown;
}

function tryGetPackageName(context: Context) {
    const packageJSON = context.packageJSON;
    // Check to see if we have an object.
    if (packageJSON && typeof packageJSON === "object") {
        // Check to see if it has a string name property.
        if ("name" in packageJSON && typeof packageJSON.name === "string") {
        //                                              ~~~~
        // error! Property 'name' does not exist on type 'object.
            return packageJSON.name;
        //                     ~~~~
        // error! Property 'name' does not exist on type 'object.
        }
    }

    return undefined;
}

This is because while the type of packageJSON was narrowed from unknown to object, the in operator strictly narrowed to types that actually defined the property being checked.
As a result, the type of packageJSON remained object.

TypeScript 4.9 makes the in operator a little bit more powerful when narrowing types that don't list the property at all.
Instead of leaving them as-is, the language will intersect their types with Record<"property-key-being-checked", unknown>.

So in our example, packageJSON will have its type narrowed from unknown to object to object & Record<"name", unknown>
That allows us to access packageJSON.name directly and narrow that independently.

interface Context {
    packageJSON: unknown;
}

function tryGetPackageName(context: Context): string | undefined {
    const packageJSON = context.packageJSON;
    // Check to see if we have an object.
    if (packageJSON && typeof packageJSON === "object") {
        // Check to see if it has a string name property.
        if ("name" in packageJSON && typeof packageJSON.name === "string") {
            // Just works!
            return packageJSON.name;
        }
    }

    return undefined;
}

TypeScript 4.9 also tightens up a few checks around how in is used, ensuring that the left side is assignable to the type string | number | symbol, and the right side is assignable to object.
This helps check that we're using valid property keys, and not accidentally checking primitives.

For more information, read the implementing pull request

Auto-Accessors in Classes

TypeScript 4.9 supports an upcoming feature in ECMAScript called auto-accessors.
Auto-accessors are declared just like properties on classes, except that they're declared with the accessor keyword.

class Person {
    accessor name: string;

    constructor(name: string) {
        this.name = name;
    }
}

Under the covers, these auto-accessors "de-sugar" to a get and set accessor with an unreachable private property.

class Person {
    #__name: string;

    get name() {
        return this.#__name;
    }
    set name(value: string) {
        this.#__name = name;
    }

    constructor(name: string) {
        this.name = name;
    }
}

You can [read up more about the auto-accessors pull request on the original PR](https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/pull/49705).

NaN Equivalence check

The main problem for JavaScript developers is that they use the built-in equivalent operators. NaN This is the point to check the value.

NaNis a special numeric value, which means "Not a Number".
NaNThere is no such thing as the same. Even NaNis the same.

console.log(NaN == 0)  // false
console.log(NaN === 0) // false

console.log(NaN == NaN)  // false
console.log(NaN === NaN) // false

But at least symmetrically Everything is always NaNis not the same as

console.log(NaN != 0)  // true
console.log(NaN !== 0) // true

console.log(NaN != NaN)  // true
console.log(NaN !== NaN) // true

All languages, including IEEE-754 floats, behave the same, so it's technically not just JavaScript.
The default numeric type in JavaScript is floating-point numbers, and JavaScript often uses numeric syntax as NaNCan be analyzed with:
therefore NaN Value checking is common, [Number.isNaN](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Number/isNaN) to check correctly. But as mentioned above, many people mistakenly someValue === NaNto confirm.

TypeScript is now NaN Comparing the values directly shows an error and Number.isNaN I suggest using it.

function validate(someValue: number) {
    return someValue !== NaN;
    //     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    // error: This condition will always return 'true'.
    //        Did you mean '!Number.isNaN(someValue)'?
}

We believe this change will go a long way toward catching newbie errors, similar to how TypeScript currently throws errors in comparisons against object and array literals.

[contributed to this feature] (https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/pull/50626) [Oleksandr Tarasiuk] I would like to thank (https://github.com/a-tarasyuk).

File-Watching Now Uses File System Events

In earlier versions, TypeScript leaned heavily on polling for watching individual files.
Using a polling strategy meant checking the state of a file periodically for updates.
On Node.js, [fs.watchFile](https://nodejs.org/docs/latest-v18.x/api/fs.html#fswatchfilefilename-options-listener) is the built-in way to get a polling file-watcher.
While polling tends to be more predictable across platforms and file systems, it means that your CPU has to periodically get interrupted and check for updates to the file, even when nothing's changed.
For a few dozen files, this might not be noticeable;
but on a bigger project with lots of files - or lots of files in node_modules - this can become a resource hog.

Generally speaking, a better approach is to use file system events.
Instead of polling, we can announce that we're interested in updates of specific files and provide a callback for when those files actually do change.
Most modern platforms in use provide facilities and APIs like CreateIoCompletionPort, kqueue, epoll, and inotify.
Node.js mostly abstracts these away by providing [fs.watch](https://nodejs.org/docs/latest-v18.x/api/fs.html#fswatchfilename-options-listener).
File system events usually work great, but there are [lots of caveats](https://nodejs.org/docs/latest-v18.x/api/fs.html#caveats) to using them, and in turn, to using the fs.watch API.
A watcher needs to be careful to consider [inode watching](https://nodejs.org/docs/latest-v18.x/api/fs.html#inodes), [unavailability on certain file systems](https://nodejs.org/docs/latest-v18.x/api/fs.html#availability) (e.g.networked file systems), whether recursive file watching is available, whether directory renames trigger events, and even file watcher exhaustion!
In other words, it's not quite a free lunch, especially if you're looking for something cross-platform.

As a result, our default was to pick the lowest common denominator: polling.
Not always, but most of the time.

Over time, we've provided the means to [choose other file-watching strategies](https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/configuring-watch.html).
This allowed us to get feedback and harden our file-watching implementation against most of these platform-specific gotchas.
As TypeScript has needed to scale to larger codebases, and has improved in this area, we felt swapping to file system events as the default would be a worthwhile investment.

In TypeScript 4.9, file watching is powered by file system events by default, only falling back to polling if we fail to set up event-based watchers.
For most developers, this should provide a much less resource-intensive experience when running in --watch mode, or running with a TypeScript-powered editor like Visual Studio or VS Code.

[The way file-watching works can still be configured] (https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/configuring-watch.html) through environment variables and watchOptions - and [some editors like VS Code can support watchOptions independently](https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/getstarted/settings#:~:text=typescript%2etsserver%2ewatchOptions).
Developers using more exotic set-ups where source code resides on a networked file systems (like NFS and SMB) may need to opt back into the older behavior; though if a server has reasonable processing power, it might just be better to enable SSH and run TypeScript remotely so that it has direct local file access.
VS Code has plenty of [remote extensions](https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/search?term=remote&target=VSCode&category=All%20categories&sortBy=Relevance) to make this easier.

You can [read up more on this change on GitHub](https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/pull/50366).

"Remove Unused Imports" and "Sort Imports" Commands for Editors

Previously, TypeScript only supported two editor commands to manage imports.
For our examples, take the following code:

import { Zebra, Moose, HoneyBadger } from "./zoo";
import { foo, bar } from "./helper";

let x: Moose | HoneyBadger = foo();

The first was called "Organize Imports" which would remove unused imports, and then sort the remaining ones.
It would rewrite that file to look like this one:

import { foo } from "./helper";
import { HoneyBadger, Moose } from "./zoo";

let x: Moose | HoneyBadger = foo();

In TypeScript 4.3, we introduced a command called "Sort Imports" which would only sort imports in the file, but not remove them - and would rewrite the file like this.

import { bar, foo } from "./helper";
import { HoneyBadger, Moose, Zebra } from "./zoo";

let x: Moose | HoneyBadger = foo();

The caveat with "Sort Imports" was that in Visual Studio Code, this feature was only available as an on-save command - not as a manually triggerable command.

TypeScript 4.9 adds the other half, and now provides "Remove Unused Imports".
TypeScript will now remove unused import names and statements, but will otherwise leave the relative ordering alone.

import { Moose, HoneyBadger } from "./zoo";
import { foo } from "./helper";

let x: Moose | HoneyBadger = foo();

This feature is available to all editors that wish to use either command;
but notably, Visual Studio Code (1.73 and later) will have support built in and will surface these commands via its Command Palette.
Users who prefer to use the more granular "Remove Unused Imports" or "Sort Imports" commands should be able to reassign the "Organize Imports" key combination to them if desired.

You can [view specifics of the feature here](https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/pull/50931).

Go-to-Definition on return Keywords

In the editor, when running a go-to-definition on the return keyword, TypeScript will now jump you to the top of the corresponding function.
This can be helpful to get a quick sense of which function a return belongs to.

We expect TypeScript will expand this functionality to more keywords [such as await and yield](https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/51223) or [switch, case, and default](https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/51225).

[This feature was implemented] (https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/pull/51227) thanks to [Oleksandr Tarasiuk](https://github.com/a-tarasyuk).

Performance Improvements

TypeScript has a few small, but notable, performance improvements.

First, TypeScript's forEachChild function has been rewritten to use a function table lookup instead of a switch statement across all syntax nodes.
forEachChild is a workhorse for traversing syntax nodes in the compiler, and is used heavily in the binding stage of our compiler, along with parts of the language service.
The refactoring of forEachChild yielded up to a 20% reduction of time spent in our binding phase and across language service operations.

Once we discovered this performance win for forEachChild, we tried it out on visitEachChild, a function we use for transforming nodes in the compiler and language service.
The same refactoring yielded up to a 3% reduction in time spent in generating project output.

The initial exploration in forEachChild was [inspired by a blog post](https://artemis.sh/2022/08/07/emulating-calculators-fast-in-js.html) by [Artemis Everfree](https://artemis.sh/).
While we have some reason to believe the root cause of our speed-up might have more to do with function size/complexity than the issues described in the blog post, we're grateful that we were able to learn from the experience and try out a relatively quick refactoring that made TypeScript faster.

Finally, the way TypeScript preserves the information about a type in the true branch of a conditional type has been optimized.
In a type like

interface Zoo<T extends Animal> {
    // ...
}

type MakeZoo<A> = A extends Animal ? Zoo<A> : never;

TypeScript has to "remember" that A must also be an Animal when checking if Zoo<A> is valid.
This is basically done by creating a special type that used to hold the intersection of A with Animal;
however, TypeScript previously did this eagerly which isn't always necessary.
Furthermore, some faulty code in our type-checker prevented these special types from being simplified.
TypeScript now defers intersecting these types until it's necessary.
For codebases with heavy use of conditional types, you might witness significant speed-ups with TypeScript, but in our performance testing suite, we saw a more modest 3% reduction in type-checking time.

You can read up more on these optimizations on their respective pull requests:

• [forEachChild as a jump-table](https://github.com/Swap forEachChild to use a table of functions instead of a switch statement. TypeScript#50225)
• [visitEachChild as a jump-table](https://github.com/Add a jump-table for visitEachChild TypeScript#50266)
• [Optimize substitition types] (https://github.com/Optimize substitution types TypeScript#50397)

Correctness Fixes and Breaking Changes

lib.d.ts Updates

While TypeScript strives to avoid major breaks, even small changes in the built-in libraries can cause issues.
We don't expect major breaks as a result of DOM and lib.d.ts updates, but there may be some small ones.

Better Types for Promise.resolve

Promise.resolve now uses the Awaited type to unwrap Promise-like types passed to it.
This means that it more often returns the right Promise type, but that improved type can break existing code if it was expecting any or unknown instead of a Promise.
For more information, [see the original change](https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/pull/33074).

JavaScript Emit No Longer Elides Imports

When TypeScript first supported type-checking and compilation for JavaScript, it accidentally supported a feature called import elision.
In short, if an import is not used as a value, or the compiler can detect that the import doesn't refer to a value at runtime, the compiler will drop the import during emit.

This behavior was questionable, especially the detection of whether the import doesn't refer to a value, since it means that TypeScript has to trust sometimes-inaccurate declaration files.
In turn, TypeScript now preserves imports in JavaScript files.

// Input:
import { someValue, SomeClass } from "some-module";

/** @type {SomeClass} */
let val = someValue;

// Previous Output:
import { someValue } from "some-module";

/** @type {SomeClass} */
let val = someValue;

// Current Output:
import { someValue, SomeClass } from "some-module";

/** @type {SomeClass} */
let val = someValue;

More information is available at [the implementing change](https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/pull/50404).

exports is Prioritized Over typesVersions

Previously, TypeScript incorrectly prioritized the typesVersions field over the exports field when resolving through a package.json under --moduleResolution node16.
If this change impacts your library, you may need to add types@ version selectors in your package.json's exports field.

  {
      "type": "module",
      "main": "./dist/main.js"
      "typesVersions": {
          "<4.8": { ".": ["4.8-types/main.d.ts"] },
          "*": { ".": ["modern-types/main.d.ts"] }
      },
      "exports": {
          ".": {
+             "types@<4.8": "4.8-types/main.d.ts",
+             "types": "modern-types/main.d.ts",
              "import": "./dist/main.js"
          }
      }
  }

For more information, [see this pull request](https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/pull/50890).

substitute Replaced With constraint on SubstitutionTypes

As part of an optimization on substitution types, SubstitutionType objects no longer contain the substitute property representing the effective substitution (usually an intersection of the base type and the implicit constraint) - instead, they just contain the constraint property.

For more details, [read more on the original pull request](https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/pull/50397).

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against c955628

[JeGwan]

연사자 오타있네요.

[yeonjuan]

LGTM

[github-actions]

Merging because @yeonjuan is a code-owner of all the changes - thanks!