Found another related instance:

declare const a: number | string;

switch (a) {
  case 2: break;
}

This should not report anything

Another interesting case:

declare const a: "a" | (string & {});

switch (a) {
  case "a": break;
}

This has a suggestion but suggestion produces an empty line

@bradzacher For the "a" | "b" | number case, do you think we should not report at all, or should we suggest to add a default? If the switch only handles "a", should the rule report that "b" is missing?

Report if the literal cases are missing with no default, no auto or suggestion fixer provided.

Considering we ignore the number etc case normally - I'd say the rule should continue to ignore it?

That's reasonable. So we filter out all infinite types from the union, and require the remaining literals to be exhaustively matched.

Also funny to note that the rule will similarly report on the type string | number | object and it'll suggest an equally broken fixer heh

Because TS's boolean type is secretly just an alias for true | false, it does handle it correctly (but that's a fluke heh)