[mostafaNazari702]

PR Checklist

• Addresses an existing open issue: fixes 🛠️ Repo: esm-utils test fails on newer Node 24 because a .ts fixture uses require() #6156
• That issue was marked as status: accepting prs
• Steps in CONTRIBUTING.md were taken

Overview

The reason CI passes is nyc, its .ts hook loads the fixture as CommonJS. Running the spec directly skips that hook and exposes the bug.

[mostafaNazari702]

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 81.93%. Comparing base (badf733) to head (3ad96dc).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #6160   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   81.93%   81.93%           
=======================================
  Files          64       64           
  Lines        4866     4866           
  Branches     1072     1100   +28     
=======================================
  Hits         3987     3987           
  Misses        879      879           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[mark-wiemer]

@mostafaNazari702 I don't want cts if we can avoid it, can we add type: commonjs to a nested package.json that applies only to the fixtures in that small folder? There should be other examples in the codebase.

[mark-wiemer]

the reason CI passes is nyc, its .ts hook loads the fixture as CommonJS. Running the spec directly skips that hook and exposes the bug.

Ah, this means we should tag it as @bare I believe

[mark-wiemer]

Ref #5494

[mark-wiemer]

Ah, we only added @bare in the v11.x branch: https://github.com/mochajs/mocha/blob/v11.x/test/integration/esm.spec.js#L85

I'll think about this a bit more.

[mark-wiemer]

Well, that bare stuff isn't a blocker for this PR, which works in both cases now with minimal big changes. Merging, thanks!