microsoft / microsoft/TypeScript

Design Meeting Notes, 2026-08-25

Open
#64,011 1 comment 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Design Notes
Dominant language
Go
Stars
111k
Forks
14.3k
Avg merge
2d 4h
Merged PRs (30d)
132

Description

Import Attributes on Ambient Modules

https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/pull/63931

  • ECMAScript now has stage-3 recognized type attributes on import statements.

    // text has type `string`
    import text from "./file.txt" with { "type": "text" }
    
    // bytes has type `Uint8Array`
    import bytes from "./file.whatever" with { "type": "bytes" }
    
  • Spec explicitly will allow these, but environments are free to add their own.

    • For example, browsers explicitly support type: "css".
  • Last discussed https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/62615

    • Big question that came up was whether we should resolve to check paths, copy as outputs.
      • Leaned towards no.
  • So #63931 adds support for import attributes in ambient modules.

    // Could write:
    declare module "*" with { "type": "text" } {
        const text: string;
        export default text;
    }
    
    declare module "*" with { "type": "bytes" } {
        const bytes: Uint8Array;
        export default bytes;
    }
    
    // For the browser:
    declare module "*" with { "type": "css" } {
        const css: string;
        export default css;
    }
    
  • Idea is that these patterns are actually limited type specifications.

    declare module "./file.something" with { "some-attribute": string } {
        // ...
    }
    
  • We match specifiers against patterns and get the most specific patterns and attribute types.

    • What is most-specific?
    • We use a form of subtype reduction based on the type derived from the import attributes, along with longest specifier matches.
    • What if they "tie"? Mutually exclusive types.
      • First one in the program wins.
  • Is the idea that lib.esnext.d.ts and lib.dom.d.ts will have the above import attributes?

    • Yes... maybe?
    • Though it's possible that now you'll accidentally end up with lib.dom.d.ts brought into Node.js context - pretty common unfortunately.
      • True, but you need to explicitly write type: "css".
    • People might already have their own?
      • But these would have a specific type pattern anyway.
  • File existence?

    • Something we can extend out to the future.
  • File copying from inputs/outputs?

    • This is what happens with JSON on certain resolution modes.
    • Causes all sorts of issues (e.g. importing from package.json).
    • Want to avoid this.
  • Merging conflicting declarations?

    • Maybe we can do something a little bit better on ambient module declarations.
    • What about forbidding overlaps?
  • Why are these types more capable just allowing unit types?

    • Why allow type: string?

    • Because you might want union types, reduce code.

      declare module "*" with { "type": "md" | "markdown" } {
          // ...
      }
      
      • Yeah, but you can just write multiple specific modules instead of using a union type. It's duplicative but it's fine.
    • Also, overrides? Unions would have allowed those.

      declare module "*.foo" with { "my-thing": "a" | "b" } {/*base contents*/}
      declare module "*.foo" with { "my-thing": "a" } {/*overrides with more specific type for 'a'*/}
      
      // vs.
      
      declare module "*.foo" with { "my-thing": "a" } {/*base contents*/}
      declare module "*.foo" with { "my-thing": "b" } {/*base contents*/}
      
      // This is now a merge with the first declaration.
      declare module "*.foo" with { "my-thing": "a" } {/*overrides(?) with more specific type for 'a'*/}
      
    • But lots of problems that can come up with "most specific" lookup.

      • Like what?
        • Part of it is now like overload resolution
        • Hard to diagnose which one is chosen (or not chosen).
        • Also, can mix poorly when types have differing IDs, working with parallel independent checkers.
  • Conclusions:

    • 7.1 will have unit-only types, no override behavior for declare module.
    • This PR will not contain lib.d.ts updates, and they may not ship as part of 7.1.
    • Future: revisit the above, plus a flag to make sure that the existence of relative file paths are actually checked when they hit a pattern.

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start by reading PR #63931 and the prior discussion in issue #62615 to understand the ambient-module import-attribute design. The notes conclude that 7.1 will support unit-only types without override behavior, while file-existence checks and lib.d.ts updates are future work. No specific file, test, or self-contained implementation target is identified here.

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
Active
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
25/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.