feat: support native type stripping for Node >= v23 #442
Conversation
|
|
||
| t.test('independent of module support', function (t) { | ||
| t.plan(8) | ||
| t.plan(typeStrippingEnabled ? 7 : 8) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can be removed when #440 is merged.
|
Can you add something in the README? |
If you run |
Not the indentation, but remove semi-colons, use single-quotes etc. |
mmm so how does |
|
Probably because it doesn't enforce certain formatting rules, like trailing coma for example: https://github.com/fastify/fastify-autoload/pull/442/files#diff-93d89c5bddae92725a3ce7b3a38a424edb3d4f4de3b403e34af97dadee0d583eR11 |
| @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ | |||
| import { FastifyInstance, FastifyReply, FastifyRequest } from 'fastify' | |||
| import type { FastifyInstance, FastifyReply, FastifyRequest } from 'fastify' | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
From API docs:
Due to the nature of type stripping, the type keyword is necessary to correctly strip type imports.
| const t = require('tap') | ||
| const fastify = require('fastify') | ||
|
|
||
| const basicApp = require('./basic/app.ts') |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Extensions seems mandatory for ts file too.
Yes for Node 23, don't know in the future.
Edit, if you mean is it possible to use other loaders such as |
We already have tests for loaders in |
@jean-michelet @Eomm We deactivated trailing comma rules a while ago as there's no clear consensus on whether it should be enforced or banned (many existing code bases ban them, many new wants to enforce them) neostandard/neostandard#143 |
|
is it ensured, that if you use other typescript engines, that it will use them in node 23 and not just use the type stripping? So technically this should be possible in other engines |
|
They aren't engines but JIT-compiler TS -> JS, so Node will execute JS files when leveraged by these tools. |
|
Can you plz merge the PR if you're ok with changes @climba03003 @Uzlopak? |
|
I merge it, so the changes can be integrated in #440 |
#441
My editor has reformatted the code a bit, but eslint seems ok with some of the changes.
I think the PR is still readable and it improves readability a bit, let me know if I should revert.