New --emitExtension and --noImplicitExtensionName compiler options

[Jack-Works]

Related: denoland/deno#8529, #27957, #35749

fixes #30076, fixes #18442, fixes #16577, fixes #33306

See also: Node.js new ESModule support: https://medium.com/@nodejs/announcing-core-node-js-support-for-ecmascript-modules-c5d6dc29b663

Summary

Improve support for deno and browser style import. Note: This pr doesn't include URI style import resolution (https://deno.land/... or std:kv-storage...), about URI style import, see #35749

New --noImplicitExtensionName compiler options.

With this option on, the following code becomes invalid.

This new options will enforce developer to write valid import path on deno (noImplicitExtensionName + emitExtension=.ts) and ES Module for browser (noImplicitExtensionName + emitExtension=.js (default value)).

New --emitExtension compiler options.

This flag allows tsc to emit .mjs, .es.js, .es, .ts or any extension user specifies.

tsconfig.json

{ compilerOptions: { emitExtension: ".mjs", noImplicitExtensionName: true } }

Source files:

Emitted files:

Discussions

According to #35163 (comment) maybe --noImplicitExtensionName should be default to true when the target module system is ESModule

Details

Due to the ts meeting note for this pr (#35589 )
I decided to rewrite ts pr to follow the ts design principle.

• Resolve TS file by --emitExtension
• Type error for import with no extension name
• Emit file as ext of emitExtension
• Allow import .ts and .tsx file when emitExtension === .ts or .tsx
• If the extension name !== emitExtension, emit a compile error

Resolve TS file by --emitExtension

Resolve type of import './x.mjs' to the file x.ts.
Will NOT rewrite the emitted file path.

[Jack-Works]

@DanielRosenwasser @RyanCavanaugh Hello, I have fully rewrittened this PR. Please checkout the new behavior! (There is no path rewriting anymore!)

[MicahZoltu]

The thing that bugs me about including extensions as enforced by the noImplicitExtensions flag is that I don't necessarily know at dev time what the file extensions for my files will be. I commonly have two tsconfig.json files in my project, one for targeting es2015 modules and one for targeting commonjs modules. If I switch to targeting es2015 modules for both and instead change to having one emit .js and the other emit .mjs then using something like this will result in one of them generating bad code. If I hard-code .js in my import statements then the tsconfig that emits .mjs files will not work. If I hard-code .mjs in my import statements then the tsconfig that emits .js files will not work.

[Jack-Works]

I'm sorry but the ts team doesn't accept the previous version of this pr that will do the extension name rewrite for you. So I think there is no way to resolve this problem. @MicahZoltu

[MicahZoltu]

Yeah, I have been following along and am frustrated with the current situation. Browser and NodeJS have diverged, and TypeScript is caught in the middle with an unwillingness to resolve that divergence on behalf of users. This means TypeScript users are forced to "pick a side" and they can no longer write TypeScript that runs in both browser and NodeJS.

My plan for the time being is to continue using a TypeScript transformer to add the extension as part of the TSC build process. This way I can use a different transformer based on target without having to write TypeScript that has "picked a side".

[Jack-Works]

I guess https://github.com/cevek/ttypescript is a good project to start with for your case

[Jack-Works]

About deno & browser style import, see: #35749

[Jack-Works]

if ts team ( @sandersn ) wants me to rebase my code to the latest codebase, @ me at any time!

[ExE-Boss]

Fixes #30076, #18442, #16577, #33306

You need to write the "fixes" keyword before each issue to close multiple issues.

[MrCheater]

+1

[sandersn]

@rbuckton I added you as the main reviewer since #33306 was assigned to you for 3.8.1,
but @weswigham, can you review this too since you've spent a lot of time thinking about modules?

[Jack-Works]

@weswigham @rbuckton
hi, I have rebased this PR to the latest codebase.
There's something strange happened because the test passed on my Windows and Linux environment but failed on CI.

[shrinktofit]

What's the status?

[Jack-Works]

Typescript team rejected this idea 😭

[timreichen]

@Jack-Works Why?

[knightedcodemonkey]

There are some options for dealing with this that might suit some use cases described here:

• @knighted/specifier for changing your ESM/CJS specifiers as you see fit.
• @knighted/duel for creating dual TypeScript packages with correct file and specifier extensions.
• babel-dual-package similar to @knighted/duel except using Babel and @babel/preset-typescript.