ref(build): Use rollup/sucrase for non-watch npm builds #5035
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
lobsterkatie
force-pushed
the
kmclb-use-sucrase-for-non-watch-npm-builds
branch
from
a995d62 to
f9e61e6
Compare
size-limit report 📦
|
lobsterkatie
force-pushed
the
kmclb-use-sucrase-for-non-watch-npm-builds
branch
5 times, most recently
from
93ec771 to
9e2840b
Compare
lobsterkatie
force-pushed
the
kmclb-use-sucrase-for-non-watch-npm-builds
branch
from
9e2840b to
aa78a9f
Compare
lobsterkatie
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 11, 2022
This follows up on #5035, which switched our main build commands to use rollup and sucrase instead of tsc, and brings that same change to our `build:watch` commands. Note: Running either of these `watch` commands produces different feedback than the `tsc` watch commands we're used to, in that the `build:types` component auto-watches dependencies (and will trigger a cascading rebuild on change), but the `build:rollup` component doesn't (and therefore only rebuilds the changed package). The reason for this is that sucrase and rollup are truly only *trans*piling (IOW, smushing the code touching other packages around in a non-semantic way, only really worried about whether it's legal JS, not whether it plays the way it should with those other packages), not *com*piling (actually understanding the entire, cross-package AST and refusing to produce code if the interfaces between packages don't match up). The utility of `tsc`'s rebuild of dependent packages was never actually to change the built code of those packages, it was just that the rebuild attempt forced a cascading typecheck, so we could know what _we_ had to change in the dependent packages' code. The process building types still serves this function, but the process building code doesn't need to and therefore there's no need for the cascade. (As you'll see in the conversation below, I myself was fuzzy on this point at first, which is why I'm spelling it out here quite so explicitly, in case any future readers stumble into the same wrong assumptions I did.)
AbhiPrasad
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 30, 2022
This switches our `build` and `build:dev` yarn scripts to use the new rollup/sucrase build process. This is the culmination of a number of previous changes, whose highlights include: - #4724, which made building types files a separate build process - #4895, which updated the SDK to use TS 3.8.3 - #4926, which removed use of the `Severity` enum - #5005, which switch our default tsconfig to target es6 - #4992, which added the Sucrase plugin, some helper functions, and the `yarn build:rollup` script - #4993, which added rollup plugins to use `var` rather than `const` and clean up the built code in various ways - #5022, which applied the same `const`-to-`var` translation to tests - #5023, which added the ability to change injected polyfills into imports The result is that, as of this PR, we will no longer use `tsc` to transpile or down-complile our code when building npm packages. Instead, we will be using Rollup to handle making our code CJS-friendlly and Sucrase to handle the transpilation from TS to JS. The main advantages of this change are: - It forced us to do a lot of updating, centralizing, and cleanup of our tooling, not just for build but also for testing and linting. - It brings our CDN build process and our npm build process much more in line with each other, for easier maintainability. - It gives us more control over the eventual output, because we have access to a whole internet full of Rollup plugins (not to mention the ability to make our own), rather than being constrained to tsconfig options. (Plugins also allow us to interact with the code directly.) - It speeds up our builds fairly significantly. I ran a number of trials in GHA of running `yarn build:dev` at the top level of the repo. Before this change, the average time was ~150 seconds. After this change, it's about half that, roughly 75 seconds. Because of the switch in tooling, the code we publish is going to be slightly different. In order to make sure that those differences weren't going to be breaking, I built each package under the old system and under the new system, ran a `git diff`, and checked every file, both CJS and ESM, in every package affected by this change. The differences (none of which affect behavior or eventual bundle size by more than a few bytes in each direction), fell into a few categories: - Purely cosmetic changes, things like which comments are retained, the order of imports, where in the file exports live, etc. - Changes to class constructors, things like not explicitly assigning `undefined` to undefined attributes, using regular assignment rather than `Object.defineProperty` for attributes which are assigned values, and splitting some of those assignments off into helper functions. - Changes related to the upgrade to ES6 and dropping of support for Node 6, things like not polyfilling object spread or async/await While this represents the most significant part of the overall change, a few outstanding tasks remain: - Making this same switch in `build:watch` - Parallelizing the builds, both locally and in CI - Perhaps applying the new process to our CDN bundle builds - Generalized cleanup These will all be included in separate PRs, some in the immediate future and some in the hopefully-not-too-distant short-to-medium term.
AbhiPrasad
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 30, 2022
This follows up on #5035, which switched our main build commands to use rollup and sucrase instead of tsc, and brings that same change to our `build:watch` commands. Note: Running either of these `watch` commands produces different feedback than the `tsc` watch commands we're used to, in that the `build:types` component auto-watches dependencies (and will trigger a cascading rebuild on change), but the `build:rollup` component doesn't (and therefore only rebuilds the changed package). The reason for this is that sucrase and rollup are truly only *trans*piling (IOW, smushing the code touching other packages around in a non-semantic way, only really worried about whether it's legal JS, not whether it plays the way it should with those other packages), not *com*piling (actually understanding the entire, cross-package AST and refusing to produce code if the interfaces between packages don't match up). The utility of `tsc`'s rebuild of dependent packages was never actually to change the built code of those packages, it was just that the rebuild attempt forced a cascading typecheck, so we could know what _we_ had to change in the dependent packages' code. The process building types still serves this function, but the process building code doesn't need to and therefore there's no need for the cascade. (As you'll see in the conversation below, I myself was fuzzy on this point at first, which is why I'm spelling it out here quite so explicitly, in case any future readers stumble into the same wrong assumptions I did.)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This switches our
buildandbuild:devyarn scripts to use the new rollup/sucrase build process.This is the culmination of a number of previous changes, whose highlights include:
Severityenum #4926, which removed use of theSeverityenumtargetto es6 #5005, which switch our default tsconfig to target es6yarn build:rollupscriptvarrather thanconstand clean up the built code in various waysconst-to-varts-jest transformer #5022, which applied the sameconst-to-vartranslation to testsThe result is that, as of this PR, we will no longer use
tscto transpile or down-complile our code when building npm packages. Instead, we will be using Rollup to handle making our code CJS-friendlly and Sucrase to handle the transpilation from TS to JS. The main advantages of this change are:yarn build:devat the top level of the repo. Before this change, the average time was ~150 seconds. After this change, it's about half that, roughly 75 seconds.Because of the switch in tooling, the code we publish is going to be slightly different. In order to make sure that those differences weren't going to be breaking, I built each package under the old system and under the new system, ran a
git diff, and checked every file, both CJS and ESM, in every package affected by this change. The differences (none of which affect behavior or eventual bundle size by more than a few bytes in each direction), fell into a few categories:undefinedto undefined attributes, using regular assignment rather thanObject.definePropertyfor attributes which are assigned values, and splitting some of those assignments off into helper functions.While this represents the most significant part of the overall change, a few outstanding tasks remain:
build:watchThese will all be included in separate PRs, some in the immediate future and some in the hopefully-not-too-distant short-to-medium term.