Checking correctness of TypeScript interfaces for JavaScript libraries

54 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Do Machine Learning Models Produce TypeScript Types that Type Check? (2023, background): “(However, there is evidence that some of these type annotations are incorrect [16, 28, 29, 51].)”
To Type or Not to Type: Quantifying Detectable Bugs in JavaScript (2017, unknown): “In particular, TypeScript’s community has developed DeﬁnitelyTyped, a mature collection of annotated interfaces for popular JavaScript libraries, for which Feldthaus and Møller built an analysis tool [47].”
Refinement types for TypeScript (2016, methodology): “present a hybrid analysis to find discrepancies between TS interfaces [38] and their JS implementations [8], and Rastogi et al.”
Type test scripts for TypeScript testing (2017, methodology): “Intentional mismatches (7/14): For various reasons, declaration file authors sometimes intentionally write incorrect declarations even when correct alternatives are easily expressible, as also observed in previous work [Feldthaus and Mùller 2014; Kristensen and Mùller 2017].”
Inference and Evolution of TypeScript Declaration Files (2017, methodology): “The analysis is an unsound, flow-insensitive, context-insensitive analysis that has all the features described in previous work [8], including the treatment of properties and native functions.”
Mixed Messages: Measuring Conformance and Non-Interference in TypeScript (2017, unknown): “Our experiments, along with others [7], show that deﬁnition ﬁles are prone to error.”