When relating A<Foo> to A<Bar> | B<Baz> | C<Kwah>, if the check fails, it is highly likely that the user wants to see the elaboration from A<Foo> to A<Bar>, rather than for A<Foo> to B<Baz> or A<Foo> to C<Kwah>.
We should try to find candidates when source types are type references, and target types are unions.
As a real-world example, here's an error message where TypeScript had the chance to relate ComponentClass<...> to ComponentClass<...> | StatelessComponent<...>:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17244638
This should also work for if two types have a well-known type alias.
Vaguely related to #6541?
When relating
A<Foo>toA<Bar> | B<Baz> | C<Kwah>, if the check fails, it is highly likely that the user wants to see the elaboration fromA<Foo>toA<Bar>, rather than forA<Foo>toB<Baz>orA<Foo>toC<Kwah>.We should try to find candidates when source types are type references, and target types are unions.
As a real-world example, here's an error message where TypeScript had the chance to relate
ComponentClass<...>toComponentClass<...> | StatelessComponent<...>:https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17244638
This should also work for if two types have a well-known type alias.
Vaguely related to #6541?