feat: Add Paseri to benchmarks

[vbudovski]

This adds the Paseri parsing library to the benchmark. In order to support this, and any future ESM-only libraries, this benchmarks package was updated to use ESM.

[DarkGL]

Why we need this?

[vbudovski]

This just adds a link to the jsr.io package registry, which is a modern version of the npm registry. Paseri is hosted there only, not on npm. https://jsr.io/#why-jsr

[DarkGL]

Please explain what these changes do

[vbudovski]

Since we inherited the tsconfig we need to flip the allowImportingTsExtensions setting, because it won’t work when transpiling, only for generating types. https://www.typescriptlang.org/tsconfig/#allowImportingTsExtensions

The other two changes here are to make this module ESM to match the top-level module, since we can’t mix commonjs/ESM.

[DarkGL]

As those are pretty big changes, could you please explain what those building option do ?

[vbudovski]

As those are pretty big changes, could you please explain what those building option do ?

There are generally 2 types of changes that were made:

1. If a parser library has an ESM version pre-built, we reference that instead of the default commonjs entry point.
2. If a library needs a build step, we convert the existing commonjs output configuration into one that produces ESM code instead.

Since we can’t mix import types, we needed to convert everything to ESM.

[DarkGL]

Tests have failed. Could you check it out?

[moltar]

@vbudovski We appreciate your contribution, and it is obvious that a lot of work went into this PR to make it work.

As much as I'd love to merge this, I feel like many of the changes are unrelated, even though they are desirable (due to the ESM requirements), which I think is currently outside the scope of adding a library.

There's a long outstanding issue (#899) to convert this repo to a monorepo, which could support package-specific settings, yet retain the structure.

I will try to address this over the holidays, and perhaps, convert the entire repo in one swoop.

Let's wait until we merge this.

[vbudovski]

@vbudovski We appreciate your contribution, and it is obvious that a lot of work went into this PR to make it work.

As much as I'd love to merge this, I feel like many of the changes are unrelated, even though they are desirable (due to the ESM requirements), which I think is currently outside the scope of adding a library.

There's a long outstanding issue (#899) to convert this repo to a monorepo, which could support package-specific settings, yet retain the structure.

I will try to address this over the holidays, and perhaps, convert the entire repo in one swoop.

Let's wait until we merge this.

Yeah. I didn’t expect that I’d need to make so many changes. I’d be happy to split out the ESM conversion into a separate PR if that would make it more palatable? Otherwise, happy for you to do the monorepo conversion.