oop - Different constructor signature for derived class -

is break oop principles (ex, liskov principle), if constructor signature derived class not same base class?

class base {   protected x: number;     protected y: number;    constructor(x: number, y: number) {     this.x = x;     this.y = y;   } }  class derived extends base {   private text: string;     constructor(text: string, x: number, y: number) {     super(x, y);     this.text = text;   } } 

no not, because liskov principle talks "contravariance of method arguments , return types in subtype". when this:

foo(bar:base){   //do stuff } 

this method expects instance of base class, not constructor contravariance of methods not apply case.

it break principle if did this, because base instance not replaced extended 1 :

class base{    foo():string{     return "";   }    bar(arg:string){}  }  class extended extends base{    foo():number{     return 1;   }    bar(arg:boolean){}  } 

but not allowed typescript compiler.