chore: exclude build artifacts from tsconfig and add legacy_createSto…

[Divyapahuja31]

Description

This PR addresses two maintenance issues to improve repository health and developer experience:

1. Added tests for legacy_createStore:

   • The legacy_createStore export was previously uncovered by tests, leaving a gap in coverage for createStore.ts.
   • I added test/legacy_createStore.spec.ts to verify the legacy alias functions correctly and exposes the same public API as createStore.
   • Result: This brings test coverage for createStore.ts to 100%.

2. Updated tsconfig.json exclusions:

   • Previously, running yarn test (which triggers vitest --typecheck) would fail with hundreds of type errors if the website/, examples/, or coverage/ directories were present (e.g., after building the site or running coverage). This was because the root TypeScript config was attempting to check these directories which have their own unrelated configurations.
   • I added website, examples, docs, and coverage to the exclude list in tsconfig.json.
   • Result: yarn test now passes cleanly regardless of the state of these folders.

3. Fixed missing dependency:

   • Detailed coverage reports were failing because @vitest/coverage-v8 was missing. I added it to devDependencies.

Type of change

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• Documentation update

Checklist

• My code follows the style guidelines of this project
• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• My changes generate no new warnings
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes

[codesandbox-ci]

This pull request is automatically built and testable in CodeSandbox.

To see build info of the built libraries, click here or the icon next to each commit SHA.

[markerikson]

If we're going to do this, I'd rather have the existing createStore test file extended so that it runs all the same tests for both exports as a test.each()-style loop.

(tbh I also don't think we necessarily need tests for legacy_createStore :) it's a simple alias and re-export, and it's clearly worked fine for the last 4 years without anyone filing a bug against it.)

[aryaemami59]

Agreed.

(tbh I also don't think we necessarily need tests for legacy_createStore :) it's a simple alias and re-export, and it's clearly worked fine for the last 4 years without anyone filing a bug against it.)

It's a simple alias/re-export, so dedicated tests don't seem necessary.

[Divyapahuja31]

Thanks for the clarification, that makes sense. I agree that dedicated tests for legacy_createStore aren’t really needed since it’s just an alias and has been stable for a long time. I’ll remove the standalone test file and updated the PR accordingly.
Appreciate the guidance.