microsoft / microsoft/TypeScript
Allow dynamic usage of `import = require` syntax
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Go
- Stars
- 111k
- Forks
- 14.3k
- Avg merge
- 2d 4h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 132
Description
🔍 Search Terms
dynamic import, require, verbatimmodulesyntax
✅ Viability Checklist
- 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 isn't a request to add a new utility type: https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/wiki/No-New-Utility-Types
- This feature would agree with the rest of our Design Goals: https://github.com/Microsoft/TypeScript/wiki/TypeScript-Design-Goals
⭐ Suggestion
I propose that import = require() should be allowed anywhere a require() statement is allowed (under appropriate module settings).
function foo() {
import foo = require('./module.js');
}
📃 Motivating Example
I've been trying to convert a commonjs project to verbatimModuleSyntax. Currently dynamic JSON imports are written as
function foo() {
const json = await import('./foo.json');
}
which are rewritten as Promise.resolve().then(() => require('./foo.json')); by TS due to my module setting. The import() syntax currently has the advantage that TS statically analyzes and provides types for the imported JSON.
I'd like to convert the JSON import to a require() call, however, a bare require() loses static analysis. Therefore, I'd like to be able to use
function foo() {
import json = require('./foo.json');
}
in order to have type inference and static analysis of the json file (also to have it copied to the output build).
(using a node import()-from-CJS is not available to me at this time)
💻 Use Cases
- What do you want to use this for? dynamic require()s with static analysis, under verbatimModuleSyntax
- What shortcomings exist with current approaches? No static analysis of dynamic
require()s. - What workarounds are you using in the meantime? Not using verbatimModuleSyntax
Somewhat relates to https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/60598
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reviewing the related issue #60598 and the current handling of dynamic import(), require(), and verbatimModuleSyntax. The change is done when function-scoped import = require() is accepted under appropriate module settings while preserving static analysis and JSON output behavior.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- typescript
- Domain
- compilers
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100