Why TypeScript Types in Applications Should Be Simple

In the world of TypeScript, developers often hear complaints about complex types being hard to write, understand, and maintain. While this complexity is sometimes necessary for libraries to accommodate various use cases and offer flexibility, application types are a different story. Application types should typically be simple. If they’re not, it’s often a sign of unnecessary complexity that can be refactored. Here, I’ll explore why simplicity matters, how to recognize needless complexity, and ways to keep application types manageable.

The Case for Simplicity in Application Types

Applications, unlike libraries, have a focused scope. Their types are usually tied to specific business logic and domain models. This gives us a golden opportunity to keep things simple and clean. Here’s why:

1. Ease of Maintenance: Simpler types mean that developers can understand the codebase quickly, even if they’re new to the team.
2. Improved Readability: Types that mirror real-world entities or business concepts are easier to work with than abstract, deeply nested ones.
3. Faster Debugging: When something breaks, you don’t want to unravel a web of convoluted types just to understand the issue.
4. Pragmatism Over Perfection: The goal of application types is functional correctness, not theoretical exhaustiveness. We’re solving specific problems, not every possible problem.

When Complexity Creeps In

Despite the clear benefits of simplicity, complex types sometimes find their way into applications. This is often needless complexity that adds little value. Here are some common causes:

1. Overusing Utility Types

Utility types like Partial, Pick, and Omit are powerful tools, but overusing them can create confusion. Instead of patching together types dynamically, it’s often better to define them explicitly.

Example:

Instead of:

type UserPreview = Pick<User, 'id' | 'name'>;

Prefer:

interface UserPreview {
  id: string;
  name: string;
}

This explicit approach makes the type’s structure clear and avoids unnecessary dependencies on the User type.

2. Generic Overload

Generics are a hallmark of TypeScript’s power, but they’re not always necessary in application code. When used excessively, they can make types difficult to understand.

Example:

Instead of:

type ApiResponse<T> = { data: T; error?: string };

If your API response structure is consistent, define concrete types:

interface UserResponse {
  data: User;
  error?: string;
}

interface ProductResponse {
  data: Product;
  error?: string;
}

This removes the need for generics in most cases and keeps things simple.

3. Over-Abstracting Types

It’s tempting to make types reusable by abstracting them into complex, dynamic structures. But this can lead to over-engineering, where the type no longer reflects the real-world use case.

Example:

Instead of:

type Entity<T> = T & { createdAt: string; updatedAt: string };

If you only need User and Product entities, define them directly:

interface User {
  id: string;
  name: string;
  createdAt: string;
  updatedAt: string;
}

interface Product {
  id: string;
  name: string;
  price: number;
  createdAt: string;
  updatedAt: string;
}

This makes your types more concrete and readable.

Practical Tips for Managing Types

If you’ve noticed your types becoming unwieldy, here are some strategies to simplify them:

1. Flatten Type Hierarchies

Avoid deeply nested or recursive types. Flattening them improves readability and usability.

2. Divide and Conquer

Break down large, all-encompassing types into smaller, focused ones. Each type should represent a distinct concept.

3. Prefer Interfaces for Objects

Use interface instead of type for object shapes. Interfaces are extendable and often more intuitive for other developers.

4. Add Comments to Explain Intent

Sometimes, complex types are unavoidable. When this happens, document why the type exists and what it’s meant to achieve.

5. Revisit Requirements

Complex types can sometimes indicate overengineering or unclear requirements. Simplifying the business logic may reduce the need for complex types.

Advanced Considerations

1. Align Types with API Contracts If your application communicates with external APIs, keep your types closely aligned with those contracts. Avoid introducing unnecessary abstractions unless absolutely needed.
2. Use Type Guards Instead of creating overly complex union or conditional types, use type guards to handle variations in runtime behavior. This keeps types simple while ensuring runtime safety.

Example:

function isAdmin(user: User | Admin): user is Admin {
  return 'adminId' in user;
}

3. Leverage IDE Features TypeScript’s tooling is excellent. Leverage IntelliSense and editor warnings to catch unnecessary complexity early.
4. Keep Types in Context Ask yourself, “Does this type reflect the real-world concept it represents?” If it doesn’t, rethink the design.

Finally

TypeScript’s type system is incredibly powerful, but with great power comes great responsibility. Keep your application types simple by focusing on clarity, maintainability, and alignment with real-world use cases. If you find yourself wrestling with overly complex types, take a step back and ask: Is this complexity necessary, or can it be refactored?

By following these principles, you can build a codebase that’s not only type-safe but also enjoyable to work with.

Support Us