Easier to use oneof=union generated code

[bhollis]

Today, if I enable oneof=union, my union might generate code like this:

type?:
  | { $case: "float"; float: FloatOptions }
  | { $case: "double"; double: DoubleOptions }
  | { $case: "int32"; int32: Int32Options }

This can be really difficult to deal with in code, because the name of the property depends on the value of $case. For example:

switch (v.$case) {
  case "float":
  case "double":
    // I can't write generic code to handle both, because one is accessed with v.float, while the other is v.double!
	break;
  case "int32":
    console.log(v.int32.whatever);
    break;
}

This also inspired a lot of the complex type helpers I use (see #1034).

A nicer codegen would be:

type?:
  | { $case: "float"; value: FloatOptions }
  | { $case: "double"; value: DoubleOptions }
  | { $case: "int32"; value: Int32Options }

Which then allows:

switch (v.$case) {
  case "float":
  case "double":
    console.log(v.value.whateverFloat);
	break;
  case "int32":
    console.log(v.value.whateverInt);
    break;
}

This would have to be a new option to avoid breaking previously generated code.

[stephenh]

🎉 This issue has been resolved in version 1.180.0 🎉

The release is available on:

• npm package (@latest dist-tag)
• GitHub release
• v1.180.0

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀