fix: Resolve the name of parameters referring to default exports

[tristanzander]

Hello! My team recently discovered some strange behavior with TypeDoc resolving the type name of a class as default instead of the name of the class. I discovered that this happens when the following constraints are met:

1. A file that's not included in the documentation exports a default function/class.
2. Another file exports that default export as a non-default member.
3. A file that is included in documentation references that type in the parameter of a function, a property of a class, etc.

Note: This can only happen if the function/class is declared using export default class or export default function, since TypeScript will resolve the type back to any normal export class or export function with the correct name.

I noticed that TypeScript itself resolves the parameter's symbol type as the name default instead of the name of the type. I'm unsure if this is correct, so I applied conditional logic to help handle this particular case.

Here's a visual example from our generated docs:

...where the correct type should be DataTable.

Please let me know if a better solution is more desirable 🙏

[tristanzander]

@Gerrit0 I tried to find a way to resolve those symbols as their re-exported name but I couldn't find I decent solution that didn't break other tests. This seems to be the way that type checker wants to resolve those types. Do you have any ideas for how I would determine if a given type was re-exported to apply this logic?

[tristanzander]

I am noticing that the declaration.type.id and type.id are different in this example. That might be a way to determine if the types are different, but I'm not sure how generics come into play here (that's where most of the other tests seemed to break on)

[Gerrit0]

I incorrectly assumed that making the change to derive the name in the type converter would just make that work - given that the type converter is getting the resolved type, I think it's reasonable to leave the behavior as is

[tristanzander]

@Gerrit0 Any chance I could get a re-review on this soon?

[Gerrit0]

I meant to merge it last weekend, unfortunately it fell off my list. I'll definitely get it in next weekend!

[Gerrit0]

Thanks!