I get what you are saying, and i always opt for the way you did it here, but they are not enums. The approach is the same, but I don't really see why you would want to name them incorrectly. If readers want to find out more and search for 'typescript enums' they will see different things than you show here.
Even though I haven't used the Typescript 'enum' constructor, what I've shown above is an enumerated set of values - an enum. I've used the above syntax because it's more common to declare enumerated events/messages/actions using union types than TS enums.
Saying you're using a feature in typescript called enums will have interested people searching for 'typescript enums'. They will end up on a long 'typescript enums' page in the TS manual which is about 'typescript enums'... and none of it is about what you use here.
I get what you are saying, and i always opt for the way you did it here, but they are not enums. The approach is the same, but I don't really see why you would want to name them incorrectly. If readers want to find out more and search for 'typescript enums' they will see different things than you show here.
You are using a union of string literals.
typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/2...
Even though I haven't used the Typescript 'enum' constructor, what I've shown above is an enumerated set of values - an enum. I've used the above syntax because it's more common to declare enumerated events/messages/actions using union types than TS enums.
Saying you're using a feature in typescript called enums will have interested people searching for 'typescript enums'. They will end up on a long 'typescript enums' page in the TS manual which is about 'typescript enums'... and none of it is about what you use here.
But more confusement is better i guess :)
For those reading this thread, TS enums can achieve exactly the same behaviour as I described above.