Add "local" option to "JSX" to support VueJS TSX files

[notoriousb1t]

TypeScript Version: 2.0.3 / nightly (2.1.0-dev.201xxxxx)

I think we should add another type to the "jsx" option in tsconfig.json named "local". This would expect a "createElement" function to be in scope when rendering .tsx files.

I think this mode would allow VueJS + TSX to work better. Currently, the "preserve" option needs to be set and then another transformer (there is a babel transformer) needs to be used on the output file. I think the integration would be a lot simpler with that change and wouldn't require a second transpiler.

I also think this change would make it easier for future libraries since they won't have to register globals, but instead simply supply a function that matches the react/vue createElement syntax.

Here is how I expect it to work:

The following would compile properly

TSX file

import { style } from 'typestyle';
import { HelloComponent } from './components'

const appStyles = style({
 fontFamily: 'Avenir, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif',
 '-webkitFontSmoothing': 'antialiased',
 '-mozOsxFontSmoothing': 'grayscale',
 textAlign: 'center',
 color: '#2c3e50',
 marginTop: 60,
});

export class AppComponent {
 name = 'app';
 components = {
 Hello: HelloComponent
 };
 render(createElement) {
 return (<div id="app" className={appStyles}>
 <img src="./assets/logo.png" />
 <hello></hello>
 </div>);
 }
}

Output file

"use strict";
const typestyle_1 = require("typestyle");
const components_1 = require("./components");
const appStyles = typestyle_1.style({
 fontFamily: 'Avenir, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif',
 '-webkitFontSmoothing': 'antialiased',
 '-mozOsxFontSmoothing': 'grayscale',
 textAlign: 'center',
 color: '#2c3e50',
 marginTop: 60,
});
class AppComponent {
 constructor() {
 this.name = 'app';
 this.components = {
 Hello: components_1.HelloComponent
 };
 }
 render(createElement) {
 return (createElement("div", { id: "app", className: appStyles },
 createElement("img", { src: "./assets/logo.png" }),
 createElement("hello", null)));
 }
}
exports.AppComponent = AppComponent;

And the following change (remove createElement from arguments) would cause a compile error:

 render() {
 return (<div id="app" className={appStyles}>
 <img src="./assets/logo.png" />
 <hello></hello>
 </div>);
 }

Error message:

Christophers-MacBook-Pro:just-motion2 cwallis$ node ../typescript/built/local/tsc
src/App.tsx(19,18): error TS2304: Cannot find name 'createElement'.
src/App.tsx(20,18): error TS2304: Cannot find name 'createElement'.
src/App.tsx(21,18): error TS2304: Cannot find name 'createElement'.

I realize I have done this out of order. I decided to figure out how it could be done, and then saw the checklist while trying to put in a pull request. I have a commit to a local fork that has a working version of this: notoriousb1t@44ade7a. I have signed the CTA. I need to add some unit tests to that, but I am otherwise ready to submit a PR if this addition will be accepted.

[mhegazy]

how is different from #9582: --jsxfactory createElement ?

[notoriousb1t]

Mohamed Hegazy (@mhegazy), I was not aware of that issue when I forked the code and then created this issue. (and honestly with that title, I am not surprised I didn't see it among the other 1000 issues when I did a search)

Taking a look through that thread, it looks like it is trying to solve the problem by modifying the existing behavior of the jsx: + 'react' and reactNamespace options to support a custom symbol name for createElement.

My proposal creates a new mode for this and does not modify those other configuration options. I made a point to make as few changes as possible in implementing the feature in my fork of TypeScript. The new code simply checks that there is a createElement in scope and adds it. I think that having to write render(createElement) instead of render(h) is reasonable.

Honestly though, the other issue if put into the prod build of TypeScript would solve the same issue I am trying to solve (making it easier to work with VueJS and TSX). The other approach is more configurable for better or worse. The approach listed here should be safer in theory.

[mhegazy]

Assuming that #9582 covers your needs, i would say it provides a better way than adding a new "mode". so do you agree that #9582 is sufficient for this scenario?

[notoriousb1t]

Assuming its PR ever gets accepted. #11267 (review) hasn't been touched in nearly a month, so I am a bit skeptical in thinking that this issue is done and solved.

I personally think it is better to reduce complexity where-ever possible, even in things like configuration options in libraries. However, either approach would suit my needs when accepted 😄

[notoriousb1t]

Thank you Sheetal Nandi (@sheetalkamat)! 😄

[kristianmandrup]

Is it jsxFactory or reactFactory as of 2018?? I assume it can be used as compiler option either in CLI or in tsconfig.json

[mhegazy]

jsxFactory is the recommended setting.