More consistent namespacing for shared types #1073
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
richardm-stripe
changed the title
ctrudeau-stripe
approved these changes
Nov 18, 2020
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
r? @ctrudeau-stripe
cc @stripe/api-libraries
Summary
Some types that represent common structures that appear in many places throughout the Stripe API, such as
AddressorMetadataare defined intypes/shared.d.ts, so that their definitions aren't repeated everywhere. However when these types are referenced from other types, currently they are not namespaced withStripe, e.g.Accounthasmetadata: Metadata, notmetadata: Stripe.Metadata. This is inconsistent with how the other types in the library are referenced, e.g.Accounthasindividual: Stripe.Person, not justindividual: Person.This PR corrects that, and makes the referenced to shared types consistent with all the other references. This should have no affect. The references all refer to the same types, they are just more specific (and I have added some lines to typescript-test specifically to exercise the shared types).