feat!: export types from main entry and remove /types export
#353
+17
−5
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Prerequisites checklist
What is the purpose of this pull request?
In this PR, I've exported all types from
src/types.tsthrough the main entry point and removed/typesexport.I've followed the same pattern as in eslint/json#198 and this PR aligns with the approach used in the Markdown repository in eslint/markdown#520 and eslint/markdown#564.
Previously, to access the global types defined in
src/types.ts, they had to be imported from@eslint/css/types. After this change, they can be imported directly from@eslint/css.Also, I've removed the
/typesexport, since the types are now re-exported by the main entry point.What changes did you make? (Give an overview)
To enable importing types from the main entry point, I used a small trick.
The
types.tsfile is built intotypes.jsandtypes.d.ts.In the built
types.js, it's possible to re-export the type declarations from the main entry point usingexport * from "types.js".However, that wasn't possible in the source. To bridge the gap, I added a dummy
src/types.jsfile so types can be imported fromsrc/types.ts.Related Issues
/typesexport json#198/typesexport markdown#564Is there anything you'd like reviewers to focus on?
N/A