若要保留先前的类型，请将对象临时转换为any

  var obj = {}
  (<any>obj).prop = 5;

新的动态属性只有在使用强制转换时才可用:

  var a = obj.prop; ==> Will generate a compiler error
  var b = (<any>obj).prop; ==> Will assign 5 to b with no error;

既然你不能这样做:

obj.prop = 'value';

如果你的TS编译器和linter没有严格要求你，你可以这样写:

obj['prop'] = 'value';

如果你的TS编译器或linter是严格的，另一个答案将是类型转换:

var obj = {};
obj = obj as unknown as { prop: string };
obj.prop = "value";

通过将任何类型的对象类型转换为'any'来存储任何新属性:

var extend = <any>myObject;
extend.NewProperty = anotherObject;

稍后，你可以通过将扩展对象转换回'any'来检索它:

var extendedObject = <any>myObject;
var anotherObject = <AnotherObjectType>extendedObject.NewProperty;

晚不过，简单回答

let prop = 'name';
let value = 'sampath';
this.obj = {
   ...this.obj,
   [prop]: value
};

我倾向于把任何放在另一边，即var foo:IFoo = <任何>{};所以这样的东西仍然是类型安全的:

interface IFoo{
    bar:string;
    baz:string;
    boo:string;     
}

// How I tend to intialize 
var foo:IFoo = <any>{};

foo.bar = "asdf";
foo.baz = "boo";
foo.boo = "boo";

// the following is an error, 
// so you haven't lost type safety
foo.bar = 123; 

或者你可以将这些属性标记为可选:

interface IFoo{
    bar?:string;
    baz?:string;
    boo?:string;    
}

// Now your simple initialization works
var foo:IFoo = {};

在网上试试

我很惊讶没有一个答案引用Object。赋值，因为这是我在考虑JavaScript中的“组合”时使用的技术。

在TypeScript中，它可以像预期的那样工作:

interface IExisting {
    userName: string
}

interface INewStuff {
    email: string
}

const existingObject: IExisting = {
    userName: "jsmith"
}

const objectWithAllProps: IExisting & INewStuff = Object.assign({}, existingObject, {
    email: "jsmith@someplace.com"
})

console.log(objectWithAllProps.email); // jsmith@someplace.com

优势

始终保持类型安全，因为您根本不需要使用任何类型 使用TypeScript的聚合类型(在声明objectWithAllProps类型时用&表示)，这清楚地表明我们正在动态地(即动态地)组合一个新类型。

需要注意的事情

Object.assign has it's own unique aspects (that are well known to most experienced JS devs) that should be considered when writing TypeScript. It can be used in a mutable fashion, or an immutable manner (I demonstrate the immutable way above, which means that existingObject stays untouched and therefore doesn't have an email property. For most functional-style programmers, that's a good thing since the result is the only new change). Object.assign works the best when you have flatter objects. If you are combining two nested objects that contain nullable properties, you can end up overwriting truthy values with undefined. If you watch out for the order of the Object.assign arguments, you should be fine.