microsoft / microsoft/TypeScript
Suggest imports to self-reference a package by its name when it has an `exports` field
Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.
- Lingua principale
- Go
- Stelle
- 111k
- Fork
- 14.3k
- Merge medio
- 1g 19h
- PR unite (30g)
- 117
Descrizione
Suggestion
🔍 Search Terms
Package self reference auto import
✅ Viability Checklist
My suggestion meets these guidelines:
- This wouldn't be a breaking change in existing TypeScript/JavaScript code
- This wouldn't change the runtime behavior of existing JavaScript code
- This could be implemented without emitting different JS based on the types of the expressions
- This isn't a runtime feature (e.g. library functionality, non-ECMAScript syntax with JavaScript output, new syntax sugar for JS, etc.)
- This feature would agree with the rest of TypeScript's Design Goals.
⭐ Suggestion
Node.js supports self-referencing a package using its name when it has an exports field. Note this is distinct from self-referencing a package working in some monorepo setups where there are symlinks from node_modules to the packages. This doesn't rely on any symlinks, it looks up to the nearest package.json and if it has a name and exports field, importing that package name resolves there. This works correctly with moduleResolution nodenext/bundler but TypeScript doesn't suggest auto-imports to the package name or have completions to the package name in import specifiers, it would be nice if it did.
This is essentially the same request as #52460 but about a package's own exports rather than its imports.
This is also sort of a request for the opposite behaviour than requested in #26044 except that this is specifically only about packages that have an exports field where TypeScript is configured to use the exports field. I don't think this really conflicts with that issue since the problem there is that without exports, it can lead to imports like my-pkg/src/something which you don't want but since package self-referencing like this requires an exports field, imports like that wouldn't be allowed.
📃 Motivating Example
Let's say you have a package that looks like this:
// package.json
{
"name": "my-package",
"type": "module",
"exports": "./index.js"
}
// index.js
export function doSomething() {}
// index.d.ts
export declare function doSomething(): void;
And you'd like to write tests that reference the package name so it's easy to see that the tests only use the package's public API specified in exports, you can already do this and it will correctly compile with moduleResolution bundler/nodenext but with this feature, the suggested import would be to my-package rather than ./index.js.
// index.test.ts
import { doSomething } from 'my-package';
// some tests...
💻 Use Cases
As mentioned above, being able to easily write tests that only use a package's public API in the same way that users would use it via the package name without having to work around auto-import by changing the import after auto-import suggests a relative path.
Guida per i contributori
Apri la guida per i contributori
Come iniziare
- Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
- Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
- Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
- Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.
Direzione di ricerca
Riproduci l'esempio usando package.json con un campo name e un campo exports, index.d.ts e index.test.ts con moduleResolution nodenext o bundler. Inizia tracciando la gestione dei nomi dei package in auto-import e nei completamenti di import-specifier; il lavoro è completato quando TypeScript suggerisce il nome del package per l'esportazione pubblica senza compromettere i suggerimenti esistenti per i percorsi relativi.
Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.
Valutazione
- Stack tecnologico
- node.js, typescript
- Ambito
- developer-experience, tooling
- Tipo di issue
- Funzionalità
- Difficoltà
- 4/5
- Tempo stimato
- 3-5 giorni
- Stato di attività
- Ferma
- Chiarezza
- Abbastanza chiara
- Idoneità per principianti
- 35/100