Support additional glob pattern formats such as `**/*{test,spec}.ts` in include/exclude specifiers

[aladdin-add]

Suggestion

🔍 Search Terms

✅ Viability Checklist

My suggestion meets these guidelines:

• [ x] This wouldn't be a breaking change in existing TypeScript/JavaScript code
• [ x] This wouldn't change the runtime behavior of existing JavaScript code
• [ x] This could be implemented without emitting different JS based on the types of the expressions
• [ x] This isn't a runtime feature (e.g. library functionality, non-ECMAScript syntax with JavaScript output, new syntax sugar for JS, etc.)
• [ x] This feature would agree with the rest of TypeScript's Design Goals.

⭐ Suggestion

a tsconfig.json example:

{
  "extends": "@tsconfig/node16/tsconfig.json",
  "include": ["lib/**/*.ts"],
  "exclude": ["**/*.{test,spec}.ts"]
}

• "exclude": ["**/*.test.ts"] ✅supported
• "exclude": ["**/*.{test,spec}.ts"] ❌not supported. (ts v4.5)

I'd propose support patterns like this, as it's very widely used in js community, e.g. babel/jest/eslint/....

💻 Use Cases

workaround: "exclude": ["**/*.test.ts", "**/*.spec.ts"]. but it would have a better readability to write to one pattern.

[MartinJohns]

But that exists already: https://www.typescriptlang.org/tsconfig#exclude

[aladdin-add]

yes, it supports "exclude": ["**/*.test.ts"], but not "exclude": ["**/*.{test,spec}.ts"] (the glob patterns)

[MartinJohns]

Perhaps you should make more clear that you want more advanced glob patterns supported.

For the mentioned example you can just use: ["**/*.spec.ts", "**/*.test.ts"]

Adding a compelling use-case wouldn't hurt either, because currently you're missing one.

[its-dibo]

voting for this feature
use case: decrease the length if the command if used in an npm script, i.e not 8n tsconfig.json file

[shellscape]

Here from the future to vote for this feature to reduce the silly size of exclude and include in large projects.