fix(mf-parser): provide getInfo advanced typings

[tpoisseau]

rework of #231

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 97.05882% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 96.55%. Comparing base (f94e399) to head (0ee1597).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
packages/mf-parser/src/MF.ts	95.83%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #241      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   96.55%   96.55%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         209      210       +1     
  Lines       19713    19757      +44     
  Branches     2223     2238      +15     
==========================================
+ Hits        19034    19076      +42     
- Misses        671      673       +2     
  Partials        8        8              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[tpoisseau]

Any idea why locally I have this error in my tests:

⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ Failed Tests 1 ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯

 FAIL  packages/isotopic-distribution/src/__tests__/isotopicDistribution.test.js > test isotopicDistribution > extreme case with very few points
AssertionError: expected NaN to be close to 12010735.5, received difference is NaN, but expected 0.005
 ❯ packages/isotopic-distribution/src/__tests__/isotopicDistribution.test.js:396:26
    394|     });
    395| 
    396|     expect(profile.x[0]).toBeCloseTo(12010735.5);
       |                          ^
    397|     expect(profile.y[0]).toBeCloseTo(100);
    398|   });

⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯[1/1]⎯

But not in CI ?

[targos]

I would use fix for the commit message because it has effect on TS users, not only documentation (and docs prefix doesn't trigger a new release-please pull request)

[targos]

I don't have the error locally. Did you run npm test or something else?

[lpatiny]

I'm not able to judge TS migration anyway but I plan to simplify the library (and make breaking changes) to avoid custom name for properties among other. Don't hesitate to create issues if you see some complex pattern.

[stropitek]

Ref: #234

[tpoisseau]

I don't have the error locally. Did you run npm test or something else?

It happen with npm test and npm run test-only

[targos]

Difficult to review TS change impact but LGTM based on updated test.

[tpoisseau]

Refs: #226

[targos]

Maybe we don't have the same dependency tree, but this is weird.

[tpoisseau]

@lpatiny

Typescript is very rich in its ability to define and express types, but if we can use simple types and avoid dynamic properties in the future, I'd be very grateful ^^.

In terms of suggestions, I'd say strongly type all the inputs and outputs of each function. I went down the rabbit hole on my previous PR #231. I had a lot of trouble typing MFParsedPart and ToPartsPart. Properties should not be added dynamically, and mutations should be avoided as much as possible. I also recommend defining all discriminated types rather than one type that would be the approximate fusion of all possibilities.

I think you'll find this abandoned RP useful for examples of precisely defined types.