ERR_INVALID_MODULE_SPECIFIER with dynamic import via jest-light-runner --runInBand

[cjroebuck]

Search Terms

ERR_INVALID_MODULE_SPECIFIER
jest-light-runner
typescript esm

Expected Behavior

It should transpile and run the typescript file

Actual Behavior

ERR_INVALID_MODULE_SPECIFIER when running the command

Steps to reproduce the problem

See the repro below

npm run test gives TypeError [ERR_INVALID_MODULE_SPECIFIER]: Invalid module "file:///path/to/ts-node-repros/src/tests/foo.ts"

npm run test:working runs the tests successfully

The only difference is the --runInBand option which is implemented like this in jest-light-runner:

nicolo-ribaudo/jest-light-runner@fb70325

I think it's something to do with dynamic import and perhaps the ts-node/esm loader is not being invoked in this case or something?

Minimal reproduction

https://github.com/cjroebuck/ts-node-repro

Specifications

ts-node v10.7.0
node v16.14.2
compiler v4.6.4
tsconfig.json, if you're using one:

{
    "extends": "ts-node/node16/tsconfig.json",
    "ts-node": {
        "swc": true
    },
    "compilerOptions": {
        "module": "ESNext"
    }
}

• Operating system and version: mac os monterey 12.0.1 (Apple M1 Max)

[cspotcode]

Might be a mistake in the way you're passing --loader?

…

On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 6:54 AM cjroebuck ***@***.***> wrote: Search Terms ERR_INVALID_MODULE_SPECIFIER jest-light-runner typescript esm Expected Behavior It should transpile and run the typescript file Actual Behavior ERR_INVALID_MODULE_SPECIFIER when running the command Steps to reproduce the problem See the repro below npm run test gives TypeError [ERR_INVALID_MODULE_SPECIFIER]: Invalid module "file:///path/to/ts-node-repros/src/*tests*/foo.ts" npm run test:working runs the tests successfully The only difference is the --runInBand option which is implemented like this in jest-light-runner: ***@***.*** <nicolo-ribaudo/jest-light-runner@fb70325> I think it's something to do with dynamic import and perhaps the ts-node/esm loader is not being invoked in this case or something? Minimal reproduction https://github.com/cjroebuck/ts-node-repro Specifications ts-node v10.7.0 node v16.14.2 compiler v4.6.4 tsconfig.json, if you're using one: { "extends": "ts-node/node16/tsconfig.json", "ts-node": { "swc": true }, "compilerOptions": { "module": "ESNext" } } - Operating system and version: mac os monterey 12.0.1 (Apple M1 Max) — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1747>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAC35OBX77MUI7PAI6T7IVLVJOGXTANCNFSM5VUQEUXA> . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[cjroebuck]

Yes, it seems that esmock explicitly checks for --loader=esmock in argv, so it is not currently possible to use the NODE_OPTIONS env variable to enable esmock at the same time as ts-node/esm.

I'm also using your multiloader package for this so thank you for that too :)

The way I got this working in the end, with esmock and ts-node/esm loaders, was to change the command from:

NODE_OPTIONS='--experimental-specifier-resolution=node --loader @cspotcode/multiloader/compose?esmock,ts-node/esm' node --loader=esmock node_modules/.bin/jest --watch --runInBand --testPathPattern __tests__/*

to:

node --experimental-specifier-resolution=node --loader=esmock --loader @cspotcode/multiloader/compose?esmock,ts-node/esm node_modules/.bin/jest --watch --runInBand --testPathPattern __tests__/*

The first --loader=esmock keeps esmock happy, but I'm assuming just gets ignored by node, because if I switch the order of the --loader's then I'm back to the original error (ERR_INVALID_MODULE_SPECIFIER).

[cspotcode]

Very clever, I'm glad it's working. I expect things may change as soon as node releases support for chaining multiple loaders. They have already merged the PR, so I expect that will be available in the next node release. Then you'll be able to pass --loader multiple times, and node will take care of chaining them together.

Is this a bug in esmock? It should support NODE_OPTIONS. If you agree, I recommend opening an issue with them.

Given that this is not a bug report nor a feature request, but is rather a useful how-to guide, I'm going to convert it to a Discussion.