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

module: unflag --experimental-require-module #55085

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Sep 26, 2024

Conversation

joyeecheung
Copy link
Member

@joyeecheung joyeecheung commented Sep 23, 2024

This unflags --experimental-require-module so require(esm) can be used without the flag. For now, when require() actually encounters an ESM for the first time in a process, it will still emit an experimental warning. To opt out of the feature, --no-experimental-require-module can be used.

There are some tests specifically testing ERR_REQUIRE_ESM. Some of them are repurposed to test --no-experimental-require-module. Some of them are modified to just expect loading require(esm) to work, when it's appropriate.

This is expected to go out in 23 and get some testing before being backported to older LTS.

See #55085 (comment) for a summary of the impact of this on loading the high-impact npm packages.

For more background on the motivation of require(esm) see #51977 - TL;DR: it helps accelerating ESM adoption in the ecosystem as package authors can start shipping native ESM with less breakage to their CJS users; it also helps frameworks and tools that take plugins to support native ESM in user/plugin code whilst they are still navigating their own migration to ESM.

Note to releasers: in the release announcements we should emphasize the implications this has on top-level await is limited to require(). In entry points or modules that are only ever imported, top-level await works fine as before. Only when one tries to use the synchronous require() to evaluate a module that awaits at module loading time (top-level), it obviously would not work, not that it ever worked before require() supports ESM, just that it's now the only significant remaining exception for require(esm).

Refs: #52697

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Review requested:

  • @nodejs/loaders

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added lib / src Issues and PRs related to general changes in the lib or src directory. needs-ci PRs that need a full CI run. labels Sep 23, 2024
@joyeecheung joyeecheung added semver-minor PRs that contain new features and should be released in the next minor version. dont-land-on-v20.x PRs that should not land on the v20.x-staging branch and should not be released in v20.x. dont-land-on-v22.x PRs that should not land on the v22.x-staging branch and should not be released in v22.x. dont-land-on-v18.x PRs that should not land on the v18.x-staging branch and should not be released in v18.x. request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. labels Sep 23, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Sep 23, 2024
@nodejs-github-bot

This comment was marked as outdated.

@RedYetiDev RedYetiDev added esm Issues and PRs related to the ECMAScript Modules implementation. loaders Issues and PRs related to ES module loaders module Issues and PRs related to the module subsystem. experimental Issues and PRs related to experimental features. and removed lib / src Issues and PRs related to general changes in the lib or src directory. labels Sep 24, 2024
lib/internal/modules/esm/loader.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
test/es-module/test-cjs-esm-warn.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
test/es-module/test-esm-type-field-errors-2.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
test/es-module/test-esm-type-field-errors-2.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
test/es-module/test-require-module-preload.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
test/parallel/test-require-mjs.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@joyeecheung joyeecheung added the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Sep 24, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Sep 24, 2024
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@joyeecheung
Copy link
Member Author

joyeecheung commented Sep 24, 2024

Did some testing with https://github.com/joyeecheung/test-require-esm using the high-impact npm packages labeled as esm/dual/faux by https://github.com/wooorm/npm-esm-vs-cjs (I took the top 5000 as the sample), output is in https://gist.github.com/joyeecheung/f691e98e0994186f14417237ccb51f53 (note: I excluded a few packages that are not meant to be loaded in Node.js/not meant to be loaded as a module/cannot be installed properly due to conflicts with other packages out of the 5000 sample, see https://github.com/joyeecheung/test-require-esm/blob/a29118dbd1f868eddc64514c93a4b02c6c157013/try2.cjs#L7)

Summary:

Impact on dual packages

Before unflagging, on v22.9.0, 363 out of 379 dual packages could be require'd. After unflagging with this PR, 373 could be require'd - the +10 comes from fixing ERR_REQUIRE_ESM, I think they were just esm-only packages being mislabeled by npm-esm-vs-cjs as dual. Anyway, unflagging doesn't regress the loading the dual packages in this sample AFAICT.

Impact on esm-only packages

Before unflagging, on v22.9.0, 103 out of 662 esm packages could be require'd (again I think these were probably dual packages mislabeled as esm-only by npm-esm-vs-cjs). After unflagging, 639 out of 662 esm packages can be required. As far as I can tell the 23 that still cannot be loaded are expected:

  1. 17 of they are defining only an import exports condition, forbidding require() to load them. If they want to open up to require(), they can simply change import to default so it can be loaded by both require() and import.
  2. 6 of them are using top-level await. A few of them are only using it to dynamically load Node.js builtins, this can be fixed by switching to use globalThis.process.getBuiltinModule() that we introduced to eliminate the need of TLA for this.

The conclusion is, most (>95%) high-impact esm-only npm packages can now be loaded with require(esm) after the unflagging. Most of the packages that still can't be required can be fixed with small changes.

Impact on faux-esm packages

On both v22 and in this PR, 526 faux packages out of the 5000 high impact npm packages can be loaded. Only blob fails to load on both v22 (without the flag) and in this PR. blob could be loaded in v20, and this seems to be a regression already introduced in v22 caused by some interop issues with the esm package.

The conclusion is that this does not incur additional regression compared to v22, but there is likely a regression if backported as-is to v20. I don't think this prevents us from unflagging require(esm) in v23 given that it already exists in v22 without using the flag anyway, but we should at least look into the regression before we consider backporting this to v20.

Impact on cjs packages

Given that the majority of the high-impact npm packages are CommonJS so the number of them is the biggest, I didn't have the time to test them all yet, but some preliminary testing and the tests covered by the core test suites at least shows that they are unlikely to be affected by this change.

@joyeecheung joyeecheung marked this pull request as ready for review September 24, 2024 11:47
@joyeecheung
Copy link
Member Author

I think this is ready for review - at least, for being landed in v23, PTAL @nodejs/tsc @nodejs/loaders

Copy link
Member

@mcollina mcollina left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

@mcollina mcollina added the notable-change PRs with changes that should be highlighted in changelogs. label Sep 24, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

The notable-change PRs with changes that should be highlighted in changelogs. label has been added by @mcollina.

Please suggest a text for the release notes if you'd like to include a more detailed summary, then proceed to update the PR description with the text or a link to the notable change suggested text comment. Otherwise, the commit will be placed in the Other Notable Changes section.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 24, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 88.23%. Comparing base (5c22d19) to head (eaa5d48).
Report is 111 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #55085      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   88.25%   88.23%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         651      651              
  Lines      183856   183845      -11     
  Branches    35850    35841       -9     
==========================================
- Hits       162259   162222      -37     
- Misses      14888    14907      +19     
- Partials     6709     6716       +7     
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
lib/internal/modules/cjs/loader.js 97.26% <100.00%> (-0.11%) ⬇️
lib/internal/modules/esm/load.js 92.24% <ø> (-0.31%) ⬇️
lib/internal/modules/esm/loader.js 98.01% <100.00%> (-0.34%) ⬇️
lib/internal/modules/esm/module_job.js 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
lib/internal/modules/esm/utils.js 98.88% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
src/node_options.cc 88.04% <ø> (ø)
src/node_options.h 98.21% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 38 files with indirect coverage changes

@joyeecheung joyeecheung added commit-queue-squash Add this label to instruct the Commit Queue to squash all the PR commits into the first one. and removed commit-queue-rebase Add this label to allow the Commit Queue to land a PR in several commits. labels Sep 26, 2024
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot removed the commit-queue Add this label to land a pull request using GitHub Actions. label Sep 26, 2024
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot merged commit 06206af into nodejs:main Sep 26, 2024
67 checks passed
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Landed in 06206af

@joyeecheung joyeecheung added the tsc-agenda Issues and PRs to discuss during the meetings of the TSC. label Sep 30, 2024
@joyeecheung
Copy link
Member Author

Putting it on the TSC agenda to discuss the release plan of the unflagging.

joyeecheung added a commit to joyeecheung/node that referenced this pull request Oct 1, 2024
This unflags --experimental-require-module so require(esm) can be
used without the flag. For now, when require() actually encounters
an ESM, it will still emit an experimental warning. To opt out
of the feature, --no-experimental-require-module can be used.

There are some tests specifically testing ERR_REQUIRE_ESM. Some
of them are repurposed to test --no-experimental-require-module.
Some of them are modified to just expect loading require(esm) to
work, when it's appropriate.

PR-URL: nodejs#55085
Refs: nodejs#52697
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rafael Gonzaga <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: LiviaMedeiros <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
@joyeecheung joyeecheung added backport-open-v22.x Indicate that the PR has an open backport and removed dont-land-on-v22.x PRs that should not land on the v22.x-staging branch and should not be released in v22.x. labels Oct 7, 2024
joyeecheung added a commit to joyeecheung/node that referenced this pull request Oct 7, 2024
This unflags --experimental-require-module so require(esm) can be
used without the flag. For now, when require() actually encounters
an ESM, it will still emit an experimental warning. To opt out
of the feature, --no-experimental-require-module can be used.

There are some tests specifically testing ERR_REQUIRE_ESM. Some
of them are repurposed to test --no-experimental-require-module.
Some of them are modified to just expect loading require(esm) to
work, when it's appropriate.

PR-URL: nodejs#55085
Refs: nodejs#52697
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rafael Gonzaga <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: LiviaMedeiros <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
joyeecheung added a commit to joyeecheung/node that referenced this pull request Oct 8, 2024
This unflags --experimental-require-module so require(esm) can be
used without the flag. For now, when require() actually encounters
an ESM, it will still emit an experimental warning. To opt out
of the feature, --no-experimental-require-module can be used.

There are some tests specifically testing ERR_REQUIRE_ESM. Some
of them are repurposed to test --no-experimental-require-module.
Some of them are modified to just expect loading require(esm) to
work, when it's appropriate.

PR-URL: nodejs#55085
Refs: nodejs#52697
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rafael Gonzaga <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: LiviaMedeiros <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
joyeecheung added a commit to joyeecheung/node that referenced this pull request Oct 9, 2024
This unflags --experimental-require-module so require(esm) can be
used without the flag. For now, when require() actually encounters
an ESM, it will still emit an experimental warning. To opt out
of the feature, --no-experimental-require-module can be used.

There are some tests specifically testing ERR_REQUIRE_ESM. Some
of them are repurposed to test --no-experimental-require-module.
Some of them are modified to just expect loading require(esm) to
work, when it's appropriate.

PR-URL: nodejs#55085
Refs: nodejs#52697
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rafael Gonzaga <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: LiviaMedeiros <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
aduh95 pushed a commit to joyeecheung/node that referenced this pull request Oct 11, 2024
This unflags --experimental-require-module so require(esm) can be
used without the flag. For now, when require() actually encounters
an ESM, it will still emit an experimental warning. To opt out
of the feature, --no-experimental-require-module can be used.

There are some tests specifically testing ERR_REQUIRE_ESM. Some
of them are repurposed to test --no-experimental-require-module.
Some of them are modified to just expect loading require(esm) to
work, when it's appropriate.

PR-URL: nodejs#55085
Backport-PR-URL: nodejs#55217
Refs: nodejs#52697
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rafael Gonzaga <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: LiviaMedeiros <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
louwers pushed a commit to louwers/node that referenced this pull request Nov 2, 2024
This unflags --experimental-require-module so require(esm) can be
used without the flag. For now, when require() actually encounters
an ESM, it will still emit an experimental warning. To opt out
of the feature, --no-experimental-require-module can be used.

There are some tests specifically testing ERR_REQUIRE_ESM. Some
of them are repurposed to test --no-experimental-require-module.
Some of them are modified to just expect loading require(esm) to
work, when it's appropriate.

PR-URL: nodejs#55085
Refs: nodejs#52697
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rafael Gonzaga <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: LiviaMedeiros <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
joyeecheung added a commit to joyeecheung/node that referenced this pull request Nov 7, 2024
This unflags --experimental-require-module so require(esm) can be
used without the flag. For now, when require() actually encounters
an ESM, it will still emit an experimental warning. To opt out
of the feature, --no-experimental-require-module can be used.

There are some tests specifically testing ERR_REQUIRE_ESM. Some
of them are repurposed to test --no-experimental-require-module.
Some of them are modified to just expect loading require(esm) to
work, when it's appropriate.

PR-URL: nodejs#55085
Backport-PR-URL: nodejs#55217
Refs: nodejs#52697
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rafael Gonzaga <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: LiviaMedeiros <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
joyeecheung added a commit to joyeecheung/node that referenced this pull request Nov 12, 2024
This unflags --experimental-require-module so require(esm) can be
used without the flag. For now, when require() actually encounters
an ESM, it will still emit an experimental warning. To opt out
of the feature, --no-experimental-require-module can be used.

There are some tests specifically testing ERR_REQUIRE_ESM. Some
of them are repurposed to test --no-experimental-require-module.
Some of them are modified to just expect loading require(esm) to
work, when it's appropriate.

PR-URL: nodejs#55085
Backport-PR-URL: nodejs#55217
Refs: nodejs#52697
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rafael Gonzaga <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Yagiz Nizipli <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: LiviaMedeiros <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. backport-open-v22.x Indicate that the PR has an open backport commit-queue-squash Add this label to instruct the Commit Queue to squash all the PR commits into the first one. dont-land-on-v18.x PRs that should not land on the v18.x-staging branch and should not be released in v18.x. dont-land-on-v20.x PRs that should not land on the v20.x-staging branch and should not be released in v20.x. esm Issues and PRs related to the ECMAScript Modules implementation. experimental Issues and PRs related to experimental features. loaders Issues and PRs related to ES module loaders module Issues and PRs related to the module subsystem. needs-ci PRs that need a full CI run. notable-change PRs with changes that should be highlighted in changelogs. semver-minor PRs that contain new features and should be released in the next minor version. tsc-agenda Issues and PRs to discuss during the meetings of the TSC.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.