ESM + Typescript

[timgit]

No description provided.

[coveralls]

coverage: 99.899% (+0.006%) from 99.893%
when pulling c6f0cf6 on ts-esm
into 5a6313a on master.

[timgit]

@davbrito and @bcomnes, this PR contains the ESM rewrite PR + Typescript tests. Asking for your opinions on the index.cjs pattern I used here (and anything else). This pattern seems to be unpopular, but I was wanting a more clean way to require(esm) than what typescript is currently producing during transpile where export default boss becomes export.default = boss instead of module.exports = boss like it used to be for require(). Obviously this pattern has a shelf life once cjs become extinct, but it at least avoid dual package publishing. I bumped up the minimum node version to 22.12 for require(esm) as well.

[bcomnes]

I can take a peek tomorrow.

[davbrito]

This pattern seems to be unpopular, but I was wanting a more clean way to require(esm) than what typescript is currently producing during transpile where export default boss becomes export.default = boss instead of module.exports = boss like it used to be for require()

It seems it could be achieved with a single default export: https://tsdown.dev/options/cjs-default

I tried removing these lines:

And had this cjs output thanks to cjsDefault option:

---

A different approach would be to get rid of the default export and just use named exports. This way it can be published as esm only, cjs users will just need a node version compatible with require(esm).

[davbrito]

Here is an example how would it be with esm only & named exports only:

davbrito@fef79d4

[timgit]

Thanks for the feedback. I'm leaning towards consolidating to named exports and abandoning default

[bcomnes]

I’m plus one on not supporting default exports and avoiding a cjs wrapper. In theory it works well in modern node but things get murky in tortured environments like next.js or deno/bun node comparability layers.