Dangerously Typed

January 07, 2017 »system-flaw

At work, I’m currently building an new Node.js Application. I opted to use Node, because the application is highly parallel and while I could have build it in Java, Node already does all the hard things that come with building multi-threaded Applications.

For my language of choice, I looked to TypeScript, because it adds some compile-time type-safety to JavaScript. For the most part, TypeScript has been helping me to write clean code that I can trust when the compiler gives it’s “all clear”. But recently, while hunting an unrelated bug, I stumbled upon something dangerous.

Minimal working example

Read the following lines of code and tell me, what they print:

class MyError extends Error {};
try {
    throw new MyError("This is a test");
} catch (e) {
    if (e instanceof MyError){
    } else {

It must print “yay!”, right? Surely it does. Let’s try it:

$ tsc --version
Version 2.1.4
$ node --version

$ tsc test-error1.ts
$ node test-error1.js

Say what now? What is going on here? We created a custom error-class by extending the build-in type Error, which is also the base-class for all build-in errors that are more specific, like URIError or TypeError. Then, we created an instance of our class and threw it using the throw-keyword.

But why does it not print “yay!”, as one would expect? When we use the Nodejs debugger to inspect the type of e at runtime, we get this:

$ node debug test-error1.js
< Debugger listening on [::]:5858
connecting to ... ok
break in test-error1.js:18
 17 catch (e) {
>18     debugger;
 19     if (e instanceof MyError) {

debug> repl
> e instanceof MyError
> e instanceof Error

Okay. So at runtime, e is not an instance of our own MyError-class, but the base-class Error! That doesn’t seem right, what is happening here?


As it turns out after some googleing, this is actually a documented breaking change with TypeScript 2.1. Here are the relevant parts:

[…], subclassing Error, Array, and others may no longer work as expected. This is due to the fact that constructor functions for Error, Array, and the like use ECMAScript 6’s new.target to adjust the prototype chain; however, there is no way to ensure a value for new.target when invoking a constructor in ECMAScript 5. Other downlevel compilers generally have the same limitation by default.


you may find that:

  • methods may be undefined on objects returned by constructing these subclasses, […]
  • instanceof will be broken between instances of the subclass and their instances, so (new FooError()) instanceof FooError will return false.

This matches our observation. How this doesn’t generate at least a compiler-warning is beyond me. But how do we fix it?


The proposed fix given in the breaking changes document is to manually set the prototype of every instance, either by using Object.setPrototype() or the objects __proto__-property. This seems very hacky to me and like something you will probably forget in that one class you wrote at Friday at 5 o’clock and then you find yourself debugging all Monday morning. Also, this won’t work in IE 10 or older, so if you need your code to run in the Browser, you have to do extra work.

Another option is to just not extend Error. JavaScript (as opposed to Java) is perfectly happy to throw any kind of object (or string, or number) around:

class MyError {
    constructor(readonly message: string){}

try {
    throw new MyError("This is a test");
} catch (e) {
    if (e instanceof MyError){
    } else {

This does print “yay!”, as expected. The drawback is, that the MyError-type doesn’t have the stack-property that gives you the StackTrace. You can build it yourself, but that seems tedious.

The third option (and the one I went with) is to change the target of the TypeScript compiler to ECMAScript 6, which has classes and inheritance build-in. This way, the code from the original example just works:

$ tsc --target es6 test-error1.ts
$ node test-error1.js

Since I run the code on Node exclusively, I can use the transpiled ES6 code just fine (as long as I don’t use any unsupported features). If you want to use this in a browser, you can run it through Babel to get compatible JavaScript. However, this adds another step to your build-process.

The choice is yours. If you know any other workarounds for this, feel free to share them in the comments below!


While inheritance in TypeScript works just fine, you have to be careful when extending any of the build-in types. Also, TypeScript doesn’t go out of it’s way to tell you about the potential danger of doing it anyways, so be vigilant!

  • Don’t extend build-in types
  • If you must, be sure to manually set the prototype of every new instance.
  • If you don’t want to think about any of this, target ECMAScript 6 with TypeScript (and transpile it, if you can’t use it directly).

Posted by Lukas Knuth


comments powered by Disqus