TS2590: Expression produces a union type that is too complex to represent, with simple file using Tuples

🔎 Search Terms

TS2590.

There are several issues referring to TS2590, but none with the specific, simple reproduction code below.

🕗 Version & Regression Information

This changed between versions 5.0.0-dev.20221117 and 5.0.0-dev.20221118

⏯ Playground Link

https://www.typescriptlang.org/dev/bug-workbench/?ssl=2&ssc=16&pln=2&pc=1#code/PTAEAEDMEsBsFMB2BDAtvAXKA9o+A6AFwGcBYAKBAlmgCMt5i8APQi6VAB2wCdDQA3tELxUAGlCEAnp3igAKgFdOCAJIjUAX1CQe2VKADk+YIQDu2QwG4KFAMa5i-YaIDC2TlKxKV8daNAAXlAXVBtyCiooOCQ0TEkLIjJyeGZuPlAAE3g7WGQeOQdEJxCNb2U1DXCKVPT+aVkFCr8NAB4fBCDQAG0ARgBdCQAFPVk+KS7DAAZDAD4ugQoASAA3ZFhFeI65VJFETOIegdAAHx6AJn7lpYB+UBGPeHHQXaQDoxnTo2J9eEMvwyQXgAUWQdgAFv8zoZUMhOFCjDBYCIeAjDAVMoo7H8ARisfAAErQADm4MIaJg+wp0H2qn2qWpsFgaIcngA6sJwTS0UhCDxoIw0QBreBSYhotYbQUAmm5RTZcUAyB5QgAWThFJVaOQ5Out3uoye0herDehxFUmwkCavlAd223QeY2k-VAWEU9Mp8Eyevdnpp3uufuyXsy4U0ViAA

💻 Code

tsc --lib esnext one.ts 
one.ts:3:7 - error TS2590: Expression produces a union type that is too complex to represent.

3 const itemCopy: TupleItem = item;
        ~~~~~~~~

Found 1 error in one.ts:3

// one.ts
import {item, type TupleItem} from './two';

const itemCopy: TupleItem = item;

// two.ts
export declare const item: TupleItem;

export type TupleItem<Tuple = [1], Property = '0'> = {
	value: Tuple extends [1] | [2]
		? Property extends '0' | 'some' | 'forEach' | 'map' | 'filter' | 'reduce' | 'reduceRight' | 'find' | 'findIndex' | 'fill' | 'copyWithin' | 'entries' | 'keys' | 'values' | 'includes' | 'flatMap' | 'flat' | 'at'
			? Property extends keyof Tuple ? Tuple[Property] : undefined
			: undefined
		: undefined;
};

🙁 Actual behavior

The types fail due to: TS2590: Expression produces a union type that is too complex to represent.

🙂 Expected behavior

The types above are quite simple. Even though the union type has ~20 values, that should not be enough to make the types fail.

Additional information about the issue

Small changes in the code above will fail to reproduce the error, such as:

Merging both files into a single one
Not using a declare const line
Not using generics, or not using generic default types
Using Tuple extends ... instead of {value: Tuple extends ...}
Not using --lib esnext

Even with everything in one file, this code just doesn't seem to work at all:
TS Playground

Type 'Property' cannot be used to index type 'Tuple'.

Bruce Pascoe (@fatcerberus)

Thanks for looking into this Bruce Pascoe (@fatcerberus).

That's a different error. This one can be fixed by using this instead:

export type TupleItem<Tuple = [1], Property = '0'> = {
	value: Tuple extends [1] | [2]
		? Property extends '0' | 'some' | 'forEach' | 'map' | 'filter' | 'reduce' | 'reduceRight' | 'find' | 'findIndex' | 'fill' | 'copyWithin' | 'entries' | 'keys' | 'values' | 'includes' | 'flatMap' | 'flat' | 'at'
			? Property extends keyof Tuple ? Tuple[Property] : undefined
			: undefined
		: undefined;
};

That failure is expected and relates to whether Property can index Tuple.

The bug above instead relates to TypeScript creating a big union type, which makes type checking crash, which is different. To be able to reproduce it, it seems like 2 separate files (exactly identical to the above) must be used.

That failure is expected and relates to whether Property can index Tuple.

The code as written in the OP produces that error, including when split into two files. That's confusing since it's not the error message you're reporting and makes it look like the repro itself is erroneous.

For what it's worth I wasn't able to reproduce the too-large-union-type error using the bug workbench (which, unlike the playground, does support multiple files):
Bug Workbench

The code as written in the OP produces that error, including when split into two files. That's confusing since it's not the error message you're reporting and makes it look like the repro itself is erroneous.

I have updated the original issue to reflect this, and avoid the confusion with that other unrelated error.

For what it's worth I wasn't able to reproduce the too-large-union-type error using the bug workbench (which, unlike the playground, does support multiple files):

Oh I did not know the Bug Workbench supported multiple files.

You could not reproduce the bug because it requires using --lib esnext.

The following is a reproduction of the bug using the Bug Workbench.

That link works. However, interestingly enough, if you click on the URL (which adds ?lib=lib.esnext.d) then refresh the page, the Bug Workbench fails to load.

Quick notes

The stack looks like this

We're testing if

TupleItem<[1], "0"> --assignable to--> TupleItem

To do this we compute the variance of TupleItem using instantiation with two marker types

TupleItem<?_1, Property> --assignable to--> TupleItem<?_2, Property>

Then we go down the structural comparison on .value, which results in checking

? extends [1] | [2] ? Property extends "0" | "some" | "forEach" | "map" | "filter" | "reduce" | "reduceRight" | "find" | "findIndex" | "fill" | "copyWithin" | ... 6 more ... | "at" ? Property extends keyof ? ? ?[Property] : undefined : undefined : undefined

--assignable to-->

? extends [1] | [2] ? Property extends "0" | "some" | "forEach" | "map" | "filter" | "reduce" | "reduceRight" | "find" | "findIndex" | "fill" | "copyWithin" | ... 6 more ... | "at" ? Property extends keyof ? ? ?[Property] : undefined : undefined : undefined

This eventually hits the limiting case

                    // We are attempting to construct a type of the form X & (A | B) & (C | D). Transform this into a type of
                    // the form X & A & C | X & A & D | X & B & C | X & B & D. If the estimated size of the resulting union type
                    // exceeds 100000 constituents, report an error.
                    if (!checkCrossProductUnion(typeSet)) {

because typeSet has all these types:

'1 | 2'
'((predicate: (value: 1, index: number, array: 1[]) => unknown, thisArg?: any) => boolean) | ((predicate: (value: 2, index: number, array: 2[]) => unknown, thisArg?: any) => boolean)'
'((callbackfn: (value: 1, index: number, array: 1[]) => void, thisArg?: any) => void) | ((callbackfn: (value: 2, index: number, array: 2[]) => void, thisArg?: any) => void)'
'(<U>(callbackfn: (value: 1, index: number, array: 1[]) => U, thisArg?: any) => U[]) | (<U>(callbackfn: (value: 2, index: number, array: 2[]) => U, thisArg?: any) => U[])'
'{ <S extends 1>(predicate: (value: 1, index: number, array: 1[]) => value is S, thisArg?: any): S[]; (predicate: (value: 1, index: number, array: 1[]) => unknown, thisArg?: any): 1[]; } | { <S extends 2>(predicate: (value: 2, index: number, array: 2[]) => value is S, thisArg?: any): S[]; (predicate: (value: 2, index...'
'{ (callbackfn: (previousValue: 1, currentValue: 1, currentIndex: number, array: 1[]) => 1): 1; (callbackfn: (previousValue: 1, currentValue: 1, currentIndex: number, array: 1[]) => 1, initialValue: 1): 1; <U>(callbackfn: (previousValue: U, currentValue: 1, currentIndex: number, array: 1[]) => U, initialValue: U): U;...'
'{ (callbackfn: (previousValue: 1, currentValue: 1, currentIndex: number, array: 1[]) => 1): 1; (callbackfn: (previousValue: 1, currentValue: 1, currentIndex: number, array: 1[]) => 1, initialValue: 1): 1; <U>(callbackfn: (previousValue: U, currentValue: 1, currentIndex: number, array: 1[]) => U, initialValue: U): U;...'
'{ <S extends 1>(predicate: (value: 1, index: number, obj: 1[]) => value is S, thisArg?: any): S | undefined; (predicate: (value: 1, index: number, obj: 1[]) => unknown, thisArg?: any): 1 | undefined; } | { ...; }'
'((predicate: (value: 1, index: number, obj: 1[]) => unknown, thisArg?: any) => number) | ((predicate: (value: 2, index: number, obj: 2[]) => unknown, thisArg?: any) => number)'
'((value: 1, start?: number | undefined, end?: number | undefined) => [1]) | ((value: 2, start?: number | undefined, end?: number | undefined) => [2])'
'((target: number, start: number, end?: number | undefined) => [1]) | ((target: number, start: number, end?: number | undefined) => [2])'
'(() => IterableIterator<[number, 1]>) | (() => IterableIterator<[number, 2]>)'
'(() => IterableIterator<number>) | (() => IterableIterator<number>)'
'(() => IterableIterator<1>) | (() => IterableIterator<2>)'
'((searchElement: 1, fromIndex?: number | undefined) => boolean) | ((searchElement: 2, fromIndex?: number | undefined) => boolean)'
'(<U, This = undefined>(callback: (this: This, value: 1, index: number, array: 1[]) => U | readonly U[], thisArg?: This | undefined) => U[]) | (<U, This = undefined>(callback: (this: This, value: 2, index: number, array: 2[]) => U | readonly U[], thisArg?: This | undefined) => U[])'
'(<A, D extends number = 1>(this: A, depth?: D | undefined) => FlatArray<A, D>[]) | (<A, D extends number = 1>(this: A, depth?: D | undefined) => FlatArray<A, D>[])'
'((index: number) => 1 | undefined) | ((index: number) => 2 | undefined)'

I believe the definitions in esnext are near the bottom; the large number of unions here means the cross-product is very large compared to when those definitions aren't present

Not really sure this is going to be "fixable". What's the desired behavior of TupleItem ? It's probably possible to write this in a way that doesn't do this computation.

This is just typescript avoiding creating a huge type, I got this when I was trying to create a template literal that was the representation of a base 64 5 number plus a sign (e.g. "+00 00 00 00 00"), which equates to 2147483648 combinations

Navigation Menu

Repository navigation

TS2590: Expression produces a union type that is too complex to represent, with simple file using Tuples #58268

🔎 Search Terms

🕗 Version & Regression Information

⏯ Playground Link

💻 Code

🙁 Actual behavior

🙂 Expected behavior

Additional information about the issue

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

TS2590: Expression produces a union type that is too complex to represent, with simple file using Tuples #58268

Description

🔎 Search Terms

🕗 Version & Regression Information

⏯ Playground Link

💻 Code

🙁 Actual behavior

🙂 Expected behavior

Additional information about the issue

Activity

fatcerberus commented on Apr 21, 2024

ehmicky commented on Apr 21, 2024

fatcerberus commented on Apr 21, 2024

ehmicky commented on Apr 21, 2024

RyanCavanaugh commented on Apr 23, 2024

RyanCavanaugh commented on Apr 23, 2024

daviareias commented on Jan 17, 2025

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Issue actions