PoC: SWC #975
PoC: SWC #975
Conversation
|
| @@ -107,6 +107,7 @@ | |||
| "rollup": "^2.35.1", | |||
| "rollup-plugin-bundle-size": "^1.0.3", | |||
| "rollup-plugin-postcss": "^4.0.0", | |||
| "rollup-plugin-swc3": "^0.3.0", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You can add this config to package.json for peer deps so we pin to a particular major version of swc but keep it optional:
"peerDependenciesMeta": {
"@swc/core": {
"optional": true
},
}
|
Thanks so much for taking a first stab at this Misha! |
|
We'll want to look into a way to configure SWC plugins somehow without directly involving microbundle. Does SWC offer some sort of |
|
Looks like there is a |
|
@developit curious to get your thoughts on this! |
|
Jason's on vacation right now so a response/review might be a bit.
@mmkal Have you used it for this purpose in the past? Any major issues/shortcomings you know of? We use |
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
Hi! Was going to write this as a comment but I thought a functional PR would be a nicer way to make a proposal.
A cleaned up version of this could resolve #943 in a way that didn't involve either inflating microbundle's size or completely rewriting the whole library around SWC.
Basically, it looks for the
@swc/coredependency, and if it's found, assumes that the user wants to useswcinstead of babel or typescript. But@swc/coreisn't a dependency of microbundle. Which means most users can just continue using microbundle as is and not be affected. People who want to try microbundle out with SWC just have to install@swc/corewhich has the nice properties of being natural and intuitive for people who do want to use SWC, and unusual for anyone else.It does add
rollup-plugin-swc3as a proper dependency of microbundle, because that's just a small javascript module, and it seems like the sort of thing microbundle should save users from having to worry about (whether they should userollup-plugin-swc,rollup-plugin-swc2orrollup-plugin-swc3, and how to configure the chosen package).I tried on a small typescript project with no dependencies, with an output of about 4kb. With swc it took about 6s, without it took 21s (and using
--compress false, timings were 3s vs 19s , see point 4 below).Some things that should be addressed before this PoC were to be shippable (I didn't attempt to do this because I am not very knowledgeable about microbundle, babel, or SWC):
@swc/coreinstalled for unrelated reasons to opt out (e.g.--swc false)target: 'es2018'fairly arbitrarily. It should also respect any existing swc config detected, if present.src/index.jsto make the diff easy to ready, but probably some refactoring should be done@swc/coreapeerDependencywithpeerDependenciesMeta.optional = trueIf this goes well and people start using it, after a few months of the community helping flush out any issues, maybe something like the solution suggested by @developit in #943 (comment) could be done with SWC. But the advantage of doing this way first is that we could likely do exactly the same thing with rollup-plugin-esbuild, and effectively support users with both. The community seems pretty evenly split between the two, and they're both an order of magnitude faster than typescript or babel.