Bug: nearly identical props interface with the same name is added

[pjonsson]

🐛 Bug Report

• TypeStat version: 0.8.1
• TypeScript version: 5.2
• Node version: 20

Actual Behavior

diff --git a/lib/Styled/Checkbox/Elements/CheckboxIcon.tsx b/lib/Styled/Checkbox/Elements/CheckboxIcon.tsx
index 8443eb5cc..880d23934 100644
--- a/lib/Styled/Checkbox/Elements/CheckboxIcon.tsx
+++ b/lib/Styled/Checkbox/Elements/CheckboxIcon.tsx
@@ -19,8 +19,14 @@ const StyledCheckboxIcon = styled(StyledIcon).attrs({
   `}
 `;

+interface CheckboxIconProps {
+isIndeterminate: boolean;
+isChecked: boolean;
+isDisabled: boolean;
+}
+
 const CheckboxIcon: React.FC<CheckboxIconProps> = (
-  props: CheckboxIconProps
+  props: CheckboxIconProps: CheckboxIconProps
 ) => {
   if (props.isDisabled) {
     return (

Expected Behavior

The inferred interface is nearly identical to the one that already exists (missing ? on the members), and even has the same name as the existing interface.

Could there be some "equivalence" between the inferred isChecked and the declared isChecked? missing?

This also shows another example of #2018: the previous type annotation is not replaced in the function signature.

Reproduction

Same as #2014.

[JoshuaKGoldberg]

@all-contributors please add @pjonsson for bug.

🤖 Beep boop! This comment was added automatically by all-contributors-auto-action.
Not all contributions can be detected from Git & GitHub alone. Please comment any missing contribution types this bot missed.
...and of course, thank you for contributing! 💙

[allcontributors]

@JoshuaKGoldberg

I've put up a pull request to add @pjonsson! 🎉

[rubiesonthesky]

Similar thing can be seen in mutation test result here: https://github.com/JoshuaKGoldberg/TypeStat/pull/2053/files#diff-6319c84205dbc04fcb4e4500e85fdb381ba38ed92154df87de3a043702b361f0

It seems that the problem is mostly happening when creating component with a function. I suspect that the React area is written mostly old class components in mind. In that test we can see, that it's actually also adding the interface twice.

[rubiesonthesky]

I think at least one of these React problems probably comes isReactComponentNode being wrong, or at least it looks little bit wrong for me. There is comment // Functions can generally be React components if they have 0 or 1 parameters which is maybe correct but I actually think we should check if return type is JsxElement (or like). AST viewer I'm trying to understand / remember how you could access that information nicely.