@tsconfig/node22/tsconfig.json uses the wrong module and moduleResolution!?!

[khteh]

I hit the following error with node22 base:

 Exception during run: error TS5110: Option 'module' must be set to 'Node16' when option 'moduleResolution' is set to 'Node16'.

Why Node16? Shouldn't it be Node22 or NodeNext?

[orta]

node22 doesn't exist, there's not been significant changes to the module system since node16 to my knowledge

[daviduzumeri]

Now that TS 5.8 has hit final release, we're seeing some differences between node16 and nodenext (as well as between node18 and nodenext), especially around requiring ESM modules. The 5.8 release notes (at least for the RC, I don't think the final ones are up yet but I can't imagine we'll see much difference) are recommending nodenext for Node 22 users: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/typescript/announcing-typescript-5-8-rc/#support-for-require()-of-ecmascript-modules-in---module-nodenext

This is like the opposite of A Big Deal but was reading the release notes and came to check on this repo figured I'd at least bring it up for discussion. (We switched to native ESM a while ago and haven't looked back; it works beautifully.)

[vladshcherbin]

node 18+ configs should definitely be updated to reflect TS team recommendations from TS 5.8 post

[khteh]

$ node --version
v23.7.0

"typescript": "^5.8.2"

I still get the following error when running test script:

"ts_test": "export NODE_ENV=development && env TS_NODE_COMPILER_OPTIONS='{\"module\": \"commonjs\" }' ./node_modules/.bin/nyc --timeout 10000 --recursive --check-leaks --reporter=lcov --reporter=text --reporter=text-summary --reporter=html ./node_modules/.bin/mocha --loader=ts-node/esm -r ts-node/register tests/**/*.ts --reporter mocha-junit-reporter --reporter-options mochaFile=test_reports/mocha/test-results.xml --exit",

 Exception during run: error TS5110: Option 'module' must be set to 'NodeNext' when option 'moduleResolution' is set to 'NodeNext'.

When I switch to env TS_NODE_COMPILER_OPTIONS='{\"module\": \"NodeNext\" }' , or removing this env altogether, I get different error:

 Exception during run: file:///usr/src/Node.JSRestAPI/src/webapi/routes/api.ts:14
import { StudentRepository, TeacherRepository, LoggerImpl, DatabaseTypes, Database } from "infrastructure";
                                                                          ^^^^^^^^
SyntaxError: Named export 'Database' not found. The requested module 'infrastructure' is a CommonJS module, which may not support all module.exports as named exports.
CommonJS modules can always be imported via the default export, for example using:

import pkg from 'infrastructure';
const { StudentRepository, TeacherRepository, LoggerImpl, DatabaseTypes, Database } = pkg;

    at ModuleJob._instantiate (node:internal/modules/esm/module_job:181:21)
    at async ModuleJob.run (node:internal/modules/esm/module_job:264:5)
    at async onImport.tracePromise.__proto__ (node:internal/modules/esm/loader:583:26)
    at async formattedImport (/usr/src/Node.JSRestAPI/node_modules/mocha/lib/nodejs/esm-utils.js:9:14)
    at async Object.exports.requireOrImport (/usr/src/Node.JSRestAPI/node_modules/mocha/lib/nodejs/esm-utils.js:42:28)
    at async Object.exports.loadFilesAsync (/usr/src/Node.JSRestAPI/node_modules/mocha/lib/nodejs/esm-utils.js:100:20)
    at async singleRun (/usr/src/Node.JSRestAPI/node_modules/mocha/lib/cli/run-helpers.js:162:3)
    at async Object.exports.handler (/usr/src/Node.JSRestAPI/node_modules/mocha/lib/cli/run.js:375:5)

[danielpza]

With node 20.19 now supporting require(esm) too, the @tsconfig/node20 configuration should also include module: nodenext

• https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/release-notes/typescript-5-8.html#support-for-require-of-ecmascript-modules-in---module-nodenext
• https://nodejs.org/en/blog/release/v20.19.0/#requireesm-is-now-enabled-by-default

[jakebailey]

TS 5.9 will have node20 resolution, if you're willing to wait for that.

[danielpza]

I'm not seeing objections to adjust the node 20/22 bases (other than there's no node20/node22 module option (yet)). @jakebailey would you accept a PR changing it to NodeNext for the node versions that support it?

[jakebailey]

I can't say I especially like suggesting nodenext given it's a moving target, but I guess these packages are a moving target too, so, I guess? I'm not the arbitor of these packages 😄

[danielpza]

Created a pull request, see #301