Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add support for typescript "Build-Free Editing with Project References" #2262

Closed
mamidenn opened this issue Jan 17, 2024 · 2 comments
Closed

Comments

@mamidenn
Copy link

mamidenn commented Jan 17, 2024

Description

In a monorepo with multiple typescript packages the typescript language server can automagically resolve imports between packages directly to the source file (presumably via in-memory transpilation). This means I don't have to build a package every time I change something in it in order to have those changes (at least the typings) reflected in the dependent packages.
Unfortunately this does not work when importing into .svelte files.

This is how it looks when I did not transpile @module-resolution-repro/lib:

ts-lsp
svelte-ts-lsp

Something appears to get lost in translation when the svelte language server uses the typescript language server 😞 .

Proposed solution

Please look into whether it is possible to support this as it would make monorepos with mixed Svelte and typescript packages much more pleasant to work with.

This is specifically not asking to support this for imports of .svelte files (I gather this would be way more involved). "Just" to enable imports of typescript modules into .svelte files to be resolved as the current typescript language server does it when importing into .ts files.

Alternatives

Run tsc -b -w in referenced typescript packages.

Additional Information, eg. Screenshots

@jasonlyu123
Copy link
Member

Duplicated of #2148. Haven't figured out what is missing yet.

@jasonlyu123 jasonlyu123 closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Jan 18, 2024
@jasonlyu123
Copy link
Member

It's actually not entirely the same as #2148 but let's still track this there. Thanks for the reproduction!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants