docs: update namespace TypeScript declarations

[stdlib-bot]

This PR

• updates namespace TypeScript declarations

Reviewer Checklist

• Check the scope of the changes (following Conventional Commits):
  • Are these new APIs? Then this is a feat.
  • Are these changes to existing APIs that could break compatibility? Then this is a feat! (i.e., a breaking change).
  • Are these only documentation changes to existing APIs? Then this is docs.
• Update the PR title to align with the change type (feat, feat!, or docs).
• Approve the PR once you are confident about the classification and changes made.

[stdlib-bot]

Coverage Report

Package	Statements	Branches	Functions	Lines
math/base/ops	$\color{green}222/222$ $\color{green}+100.00\%$	$\color{green}1/1$ $\color{green}+100.00\%$	$\color{green}0/0$ $\color{green}+100.00\%$	$\color{green}222/222$ $\color{green}+100.00\%$
stats/base	$\color{green}1932/1932$ $\color{green}+100.00\%$	$\color{green}1/1$ $\color{green}+100.00\%$	$\color{green}0/0$ $\color{green}+100.00\%$	$\color{green}1932/1932$ $\color{green}+100.00\%$

The above coverage report was generated for the changes in this PR.

[Planeshifter]

@kgryte @aayush0325

I am noticing per this PR that the namespace exports in lib/index.js for both math/base/ops and stats/base now export packages from other namespaces. Is this intentional?

This likely will have undesirable effects due to pulling in new dependencies for various namespaces. Our tooling also doesn't envision this. #5332 removes the packages from the README.md table of contents as they are not part of the namespace package anymore, so documentation and actual package contents are going out of sync.

I would argue that we should remove the moved packages from the old namespaces and provide a migration path to end-users with the next release of the packages.

[kgryte]

@Planeshifter Yes, this is intentional. The plan is to migrate all the exports to a new namespace in one fell swoop. Otherwise, the migration process becomes more complicated.

[kgryte]

@Planeshifter That #5332 removes the packages from the README docs seems like a limitation of the tooling that could be addressed. But also, that is not a blocker for me, as it simply makes the exports "hidden" before we actually migrate the exports to a new namespace.

[Planeshifter]

@kgryte Thanks for the clarification!