fix: make sur it works in browser where tty package isnt available

[WNemencha]

No description provided.

[jorgebucaran]

I'm curious. How are you using Colorette in the browser?

[WNemencha]

It's used in our dependencies by some tools (postcss i guess) and postcss is used by sanitize-html, which we do use to sanitize markdown ^^. The fact that its here in the bundle was throwing like: tty.isatty is not a function. I've tried to "polyfill" it by setting window.tty.isatty = () => false, but didn't worked, so here's the working fix (can confirm, tried with package.json#resolutions on my branch)

PS: I hope this message does not feels harsh, whishing u a great evening ;)

[jorgebucaran]

Shouldn't this be handled by your bundler or compiler?

[kibertoad]

@jorgebucaran How can webpack handle Node context not being there?

[jorgebucaran]

I really don't know. What about a global shim? Colorette shouldn't be in the OP's bundle to start with.

[kibertoad]

SSR is one possible option. Serverless is another.
I'm not sure there is a good working solution, and what is the issue with handling gracefully on colorette side? doesn't it come with zero performance impact?

[WNemencha]

Agree with @kibertoad, that's just a branch, and branches are cheap. Configuration of bundle processor in the other side isn't about branches, thus costly ^^

[kibertoad]

@WNemencha I wonder why additional check is necessary, though. Wouldn't tty be undefined already? Also is 'process' available? I would expect that to fail too.

[WNemencha]

@kibertoad The tty from the import is undefined if u have a commonjs bundle, when using ESM, it will still returns a { __esModule: true } i believe, so the tty && will still evaluate to true, and then {}.isatty() call will obviously throws :(
Also, modern browsers supports process.browser: boolean as a mean to check if in a browser

[LeoniePhiline]

@WNemencha This is exactly #67

Proposal:

tty?.isatty?.(1)

This works even if bundlers proxy / mock the module but not the function. (e.g. in vite)

[jorgebucaran]

@WNemencha Also, modern browsers supports process.browser...

Do you mean bundlers add special support for this? I'm not aware of any process.browser API in browsers or in node, is this an old thing? We are currently importing process explicitly, but maybe we don't have to?