TypeScript Contribution Diary: Improved Errors on Invalid Variable Names

September 15, 2020

Photo of Bud Abbott and Lou Costello from their NBC Radio program

Photo of Bud Abbott and Lou Costello from their NBC Radio program.
File copied from Wikipedia under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license. [source]

Problem Statement

Reading through error messages emitted by TypeScript can sometimes feel like the old “Who’s on First?” routine, where every word has two meanings and you can never be sure exactly what any particular phrase refers to.

One example complaint is Improve wrong usage of case compile errors #19352, first filed in 2017. Without reading it, can you guess what a reasonable error message for this line of code should be?

const case = "123";

If your guess focused on the case keyword not being allowed as a variable name and was anything like 'case' is not allowed as a variable declaration name, then congrats, you win! If not, that’s ok, because TypeScript <4.1 emits three instances of not-so-informative error message:

const case = 123;
//    ~~~~ Variable declaration expected.
//         ~ Variable declaration expected.
//           ~~~ Variable declaration expected.

🤔 Not the most useful error message in the world.

This post describes what I did to improve that error to be more understandable. Let’s dig in!

But Why?

As with any TypeScript error message improvement investigation, I started by searching on how the original emitted error is achieved. I found exactly one usage of it, in src/compiler/parser.ts:

function parsingContextErrors(context: ParsingContext): DiagnosticMessage {
    switch (context) {
        // ...(a bunch of similar looking cases)
        case ParsingContext.VariableDeclarations:
            return Diagnostics.Variable_declaration_expected;
        // ...(a bunch of similar looking cases)

I added a console.log(new Error()) to the ParsingContext.VariableDeclaration code locally and re-ran to grab the full stack of where this code gets called on a file containing const case = 123:

    at parsingContextErrors (C:\Code\temp\node_modules\typescript\lib\tsc.js:16677:33)
    at abortParsingListOrMoveToNextToken (C:\Code\temp\node_modules\typescript\lib\tsc.js:16657:38)
    at parseDelimitedList (C:\Code\temp\node_modules\typescript\lib\tsc.js:16726:21)
    at parseVariableDeclarationList (C:\Code\temp\node_modules\typescript\lib\tsc.js:19406:37)
    at parseVariableStatement (C:\Code\temp\node_modules\typescript\lib\tsc.js:19416:36)
    at parseDeclarationWorker (C:\Code\temp\node_modules\typescript\lib\tsc.js:19264:28)
    at parseDeclaration (C:\Code\temp\node_modules\typescript\lib\tsc.js:19248:24)
    at parseStatement (C:\Code\temp\node_modules\typescript\lib\tsc.js:19219:32)
    at parseListElement (C:\Code\temp\node_modules\typescript\lib\tsc.js:16495:20)
    at parseList (C:\Code\temp\node_modules\typescript\lib\tsc.js:16479:35)

Scanning through the names of the functions and their implementations, here’s generally what I reasoned was happening:

  1. parseList is a general driver for reading in some kind of list; its parseElement parameter is the the logic specific to the kind of list.
  2. parseDeclaration uses parseDeclarationWorker to delegate to the corresponding parser to the type of list — in this case, SyntaxKind.ConstKeyword.
  3. parseDelimitedList continuously adds to the list until either:

    • Happy case: it finds a list terminator (ref, ref).
    • Unhappy case: list parsing is aborted (ref).
  4. parsingContextErrors produces the appropriate context error for the list.

In conclusion, that last step is where the actual error message is produced. Reasonable.

New Messaging

Now that I knew where the error message comes from, I needed to decide on a new message. The 'case' is not allowed as a variable declaration name suggestion from above seemed like a pretty reasonable first guess.

To verify, I checked what a few different JavaScript engines emit for the const case = 123 snippet:

  • Chrome: SyntaxError: Unexpected token 'case'
  • Firefox: SyntaxError: missing variable name
  • Internet Explorer: The use of a keyword for an identifier is invalid

Wow. I never thought I’d see the day when the Internet Explorer error message is better than both Chrome’s and Firefox’s. 😂

Anyway, none of these were particularly better than what I was thinking of, so I added '{0}' is not allowed as a variable declaration name. as a new diagnostic to diagnosticMessages.json.

Changing the Parser

The first thought that came to mind was to use the new error message in all places. Would all the possible cases of invalid identifiers in variable declaration lists benefit from mentioning the offending token?

To check, I searched for Variable declaration expected in test cases. There were a lot. Skimming through them, there seemed to be a few common cases of errors…

Clear Improvements

Such as in bitwiseNotOperatorInvalidOperations.ts:

var mul = ~[1, 2, "abc"], "";
//                        ~~

'""' is not an allowed variable name. would be a reasonable diagnostic.

Debatably Equivalent Messages

Such as in expressionTypeNodeShouldError.ts:

class C3 {
    foo() {
        const x: false.typeof(;
//                     ~~~~~~

'typeof' is not an allowed variable name. is maybe equally confusing as Variable declaration expected.? Unclear.

Arguably Degraded Quality

Such as in getJavaScriptSyntacticDiagnostics02.ts:

var v = /[]/]/
//          ~

/[]/ is a complete regular expression; saying a declaration is expected after it is a bit closer to the truth than complaining about a name.

Making Changes

Ok, so the nice new error message isn’t applicable in all cases. Can we return a different error message in parsingContextErrors based on the token being complained on? Roughly:

  • If the token is one of the known invalid ones such as case, we should give a more specific “this isn’t a valid variable name” error.
  • Otherwise, give the same general error as before.

Question: how could we tell whether the token is a banned keyword? Is there a specific SyntaxKind range, or pre-existing utility, or…?

Checking Invalidity Validity

I knew to start that it wouldn’t be easy to set up an allowlist of ok SyntaxKind members, as that list would huge: BreakKeyword, CaseKeyword, ClassKeyword, …

I ran a few searches for regular expression terms like /is.*valid.*identifier/ but didn’t find any good utilities. Fortunately, the cases we’re looking for are uniformly those where an English keyword (e.g. case) is the culprit, so… maybe we could filter on tokens that start with a valid a-Z letter?

A little bit of searching for /string.*token/ and /token.*string/ found a tokenToString utility for converting a token to its string. Great!

I changed the logic in parsingContextErrors for specifically variable declarations to check the token string:

case ParsingContext.VariableDeclarations:
    const tokenString = tokenToString(token());
    return tokenString && /\w+/.test(tokenString[0])
        ? Diagnostics._0_is_not_allowed_as_a_variable_declaration_name
        : Diagnostics.Variable_declaration_expected;

Messaging Token Names

Problem: although parsingContextErrors was now returning the correct diagnostic for invalid tokens, it wasn’t returning the tokenString to be used in it.

It seemed wasteful to change parseErrorAtCurrentToken to call tokenToString(token()) again. Instead, I changed parsingContextErrors to return a tuple (array) containing at least the diagnostic, and optionally a string to add to it:

case ParsingContext.VariableDeclarations:
    const tokenString = tokenToString(token());
    return tokenString && /\w+/.test(tokenString[0])
        ? [Diagnostics._0_is_not_allowed_as_a_variable_declaration_name, tokenString]
        : [Diagnostics.Variable_declaration_expected];

…and abortParsingListOrMoveToNextToken to pass all of parsingContextError’s results to parseErrorAtCurrentToken:

function abortParsingListOrMoveToNextToken(kind: ParsingContext) {
-    parseErrorAtCurrentToken(parsingContextErrors(kind));
+    parseErrorAtCurrentToken(...parsingContextErrors(kind));

parseErrorAtCurrentToken already took in an optional arg0, so this just worked. Super!

Testing it Out

I built these changes locally and ran built/local/tsc.js on a file containing const case = 123;. The errors were… somewhat encouraging!

index.ts:6:7 - error TS1389: 'case' is not allowed as a variable declaration name.

6 const case = 123;

index.ts:6:12 - error TS1134: Variable declaration expected.

6 const case = 123;

index.ts:6:14 - error TS1134: Variable declaration expected.

6 const case = 123;

Ideally we should really only be emitting an error for the first case and skip emitting anything for the other two. I skimmed the code areas around the parser and was discouraged from making changes pretty quickly. Making changes to the parser’s behavior around list abortions would require changing how the parser calculates what is or isn’t in the list, which would result in changes to the emitted (invalid) JavaScript.

I’ve learned the hard way that changes to emitted JavaScript take much longer to get approved (ahem, still waiting on #29374 and #33337…). Improving parser tolerance on invalid identifiers would have to wait for another day.

Pull Request Review

I cleaned up the code changes, updated now-failing baseline tests, and sent it out for review: Specified error diagnostic for invalid variable names #40105. It came back later that day (speedy!) with a few requested changes…


Comment: Why not just test whether the token is a keyword? i.e. use isKeyword

Aha! So there is a utility to check whether a token is a keyword! Super.

case ParsingContext.VariableDeclarations:
-   const tokenString = tokenToString(token());
-   return tokenString && /\w+/.test(tokenString[0])
-       ? [Diagnostics._0_is_not_allowed_as_a_variable_declaration_name, tokenString, tokenString]
+   return isKeyword(token())
+       ? [Diagnostics._0_is_not_allowed_as_a_variable_declaration_name, tokenString, tokenToString(token())]
        : [Diagnostics.Variable_declaration_expected];

Avoiding Array Allocations

Comment: Nit: I kinda dislike allocating an array on each of these, but maybe it’s fine. I would have just made it take the error-reporting callback.

Reasonable! Creating and spreading arrays is admittedly an odd thing to do here.

parsingContextErrors is only ever called by abortParsingListOrMoveToNextToken, so I had it directly call parseErrorAtCurrentToken instead of a callback.

case ParsingContext.VariableDeclarations:
    return isKeyword(token())
-       ? [Diagnostics._0_is_not_allowed_as_a_variable_declaration_name, tokenString, tokenToString(token())]
-       : [Diagnostics.Variable_declaration_expected];
+       ? parseErrorAtCurrentToken(Diagnostics._0_is_not_allowed_as_a_variable_declaration_name, tokenToString(token()))
+       : parseErrorAtCurrentToken(Diagnostics.Variable_declaration_expected);
function abortParsingListOrMoveToNextToken(kind: ParsingContext) {
-    parseErrorAtCurrentToken(...parsingContextErrors(kind));
+    parsingContextErrors(kind);

Clarifying Scope

Comment: Does this also fix #11648. If not, that’s okay, keep the change separate.

Correct, this change does not affect other forms of intolerant parser weirdness.

Wrapping up

I sent up the code changes as a commit, responded to the comments, and was happy to see the PR merged later that week. Yay! 🙌

You can now experience these slightly improved error messages in the nightly builds of TypeScript and any subsequent version >=4.1.

Next Steps

I still want to make list parsing more tolerant of invalid identifiers, so I filed #40317. Hopefully we’ll get to have a sequel to this post discussing resolving that followup!

Lastly, many thanks to @DanielRossenwaser for the quick & informative PR reviews. Much appreciated!

Josh GoldbergHi! I'm a frontend developer from New York. This is my blog about JavaScript, TypeScript, and scaling web application development.
This site's open source on GitHub. Found a problem? File an issue!