|
| 1 | +- Start Date: 2018-02-14 |
| 2 | +- RFC PR: (leave this empty) |
| 3 | +- Tracking Issue: (leave this empty) |
| 4 | + |
| 5 | +# Summary |
| 6 | +[summary]: #summary |
| 7 | + |
| 8 | +Enable Rust crates to transparently depend on packages in the npm ecosystem. |
| 9 | +These dependencies will, like normal Rust dependencies through Cargo, work |
| 10 | +seamlessly when consumed by other crates. |
| 11 | + |
| 12 | +# Motivation |
| 13 | +[motivation]: #motivation |
| 14 | + |
| 15 | +The primary goal of `wasm-bindgen` and `wasm-pack` is to enable seamless |
| 16 | +integration of Rust with JS. A massive portion of the JS ecosystem, npm, however |
| 17 | +currently has little support in `wasm-bindgen` and `wasm-pack`, making it |
| 18 | +difficult to access this rich resource that JS offers! |
| 19 | + |
| 20 | +The goal of this RFC is to enable these dependencies to exist. Rust crates |
| 21 | +should be able to require functionality from NPM, just like how NPM can require |
| 22 | +Rust crates compiled to wasm. Any workflow which currently uses NPM packages |
| 23 | +(such as packaging WebAssembly with a bundler) should continue to work but also |
| 24 | +allow pulling in "custom" NPM packages as well as requested by Rust |
| 25 | +dependencies. |
| 26 | + |
| 27 | +# Stakeholders |
| 28 | +[stakeholders]: #stakeholders |
| 29 | + |
| 30 | +This RFC primarily affects uses of `wasm-pack` and `wasm-bindgen` who are also |
| 31 | +currently using bundlers like Webpack. This also affects, however, developers of |
| 32 | +core foundational crates in the Rust ecosystem who want to be concious of the |
| 33 | +ability to pull in NPM dependencies and such. |
| 34 | + |
| 35 | +# Detailed Explanation |
| 36 | +[detailed-explanation]: #detailed-explanation |
| 37 | + |
| 38 | +Adding an NPM dependency to a Rust project will look very similar to adding an |
| 39 | +NPM dependency to a normal JS project. First the dependency, and its version |
| 40 | +requirement, need to be declare. This RFC proposes doing this in a |
| 41 | +`package.json` file adjacent to the crate's `Cargo.toml` file: |
| 42 | + |
| 43 | +```json |
| 44 | + { |
| 45 | + "dependencies": { |
| 46 | + "foo": "^1.0.1" |
| 47 | + } |
| 48 | +} |
| 49 | +``` |
| 50 | + |
| 51 | +The `package.json` file will initially be a subset of NPM's `package.json`, |
| 52 | +only supporting one `dependencies` top-level key which internally has key/value |
| 53 | +pairs with strings. Beyond this validation though no validation will be |
| 54 | +performed of either key or value pairs within `dependencies`. In the future |
| 55 | +it's intended that more keys of `package.json` in NPM will be supported, but |
| 56 | +this RFC is intended to be an MVP for now to enable dependencies on NPM at all. |
| 57 | + |
| 58 | +After this `package.json` file is created, the package next needs to be |
| 59 | +imported in the Rust crate. Like with other Rust dependencies on JS, this will |
| 60 | +be done with the `#[wasm_bindgen]` attribute: |
| 61 | + |
| 62 | +```rust |
| 63 | +#[wasm_bindgen(module = "foo")] |
| 64 | +extern "C" { |
| 65 | + fn function_in_foo_package(); |
| 66 | +} |
| 67 | +``` |
| 68 | + |
| 69 | +> **Note**: in JS the above import would be similar to: |
| 70 | +> |
| 71 | +> ```js |
| 72 | +> import { function_in_foo_package } from "foo"; |
| 73 | +> ``` |
| 74 | +
|
| 75 | +The exiting `module` key in the `#[wasm_bindgen]` attribute can be used to |
| 76 | +indicate which ES module the import is coming from. This affects the `module` |
| 77 | +key in the final output wasm binary, and corresponds to the name of the package |
| 78 | +in `package.json`. This is intended to match how bundler conventions already |
| 79 | +interpret NPM packages as ES modules. |
| 80 | +
|
| 81 | +After these two tools are in place, all that's needed is a `wasm-pack build` and |
| 82 | +you should be good to go! The final `package.json` will have the `foo` |
| 83 | +dependency listed in our `package.json` above and be ready for consumption via a |
| 84 | +bundler. |
| 85 | +
|
| 86 | +### Technical Implementation |
| 87 | +
|
| 88 | +Under the hood there's a few moving parts which enables all of this to happen. |
| 89 | +Let's first take a look at the pieces in `wasm-bindgen`. |
| 90 | +
|
| 91 | +The primary goal of this RFC is to enable *tranparent* and *transitive* |
| 92 | +dependencies on NPM. The `#[wasm_bindgen]` macro is the only aspect of a crate's |
| 93 | +build which has access to all transitive dependencies, so this is what we'll be |
| 94 | +using to slurp up `package.json`. When `#[wasm_bindgen]` with a `module` key is |
| 95 | +specified it will look for `package.json` inside the cwd of the procedural macro |
| 96 | +(note that the cwd is set by Cargo to be the directory with the crate's |
| 97 | +`Cargo.toml` that is being compiled, or the crate in which `#[wasm_bindgen]` is |
| 98 | +written). This `package.json`, if found, will have an absolute path to it |
| 99 | +encoded into the custom section that `wasm-bindgen` already emits. |
| 100 | +
|
| 101 | +Later, when the `wasm-bindgen` CLI tool executes, it will parse an interpret all |
| 102 | +items in the wasm-bindgen custom section. All `package.json` files listed will |
| 103 | +be loaded, parsed, and validated (aka only `dependencies` allowed for now). If |
| 104 | +any `package.json` is loaded then a `package.json` file will be emitted next to |
| 105 | +the output JS file inside of `--out-dir`. |
| 106 | +
|
| 107 | +After `wasm-bindgen` executes, then `wasm-pack` will read the `package.json` |
| 108 | +output, if any, and augment it with metadata and other items which are already |
| 109 | +emitted. |
| 110 | +
|
| 111 | +If more than one crate in a dependency graph depends on an NPM package then in |
| 112 | +this MVP proposal an error will be generated. In the future we can implement |
| 113 | +some degree of merging version requirements, but for now to remain simple |
| 114 | +`wasm-bindgen` will emit an error. |
| 115 | +
|
| 116 | +### Interaction with `--no-modules` |
| 117 | +
|
| 118 | +Depending on NPM packages fundamentally requires, well, NPM, in one way or |
| 119 | +another. The `wasm-bindgen` and `wasm-pack` CLI tools have modes of output |
| 120 | +(notably `wasm-bindgen`'s `--no-modules` and `wasm-pack`'s `--target no-modules` |
| 121 | +flags) which are intended to not require NPM and other JS tooling. In these |
| 122 | +situations if a `package.json` in any Rust crate is detected an error will be |
| 123 | +emitted indicating so. |
| 124 | +
|
| 125 | +Note that this means that core crates which are intended to work with |
| 126 | +`--no-modules` will not be able add NPM dependencies. Instead they'll have to |
| 127 | +either import Rust dependencies from crates.io or use a feature like [local JS |
| 128 | +snippets][js] to import custom JS code. |
| 129 | +
|
| 130 | +[js]: https://github.com/rustwasm/rfcs/pull/6 |
| 131 | +
|
| 132 | +# Drawbacks |
| 133 | +[drawbacks]: #drawbacks |
| 134 | +
|
| 135 | +One of the primary drawbacks of this RFC is that it's fundamentally incompatible |
| 136 | +with a major use case of `wasm-bindgen` and `wasm-pack`, the `--no-modules` and |
| 137 | +`--target no-modules` flags. As a short-term band-aid this RFC proposes making |
| 138 | +it a hard error which would hinder the adoption of this feature in crates that |
| 139 | +want to be usable in this mode. |
| 140 | +
|
| 141 | +In the long-term, however, it may be possible to get this working. For example |
| 142 | +many NPM packages are available on `unpkg.com` or in other locations. It may be |
| 143 | +possible, if all packages in these locations adhere to well-known conventions, |
| 144 | +to generate code that's compatible with these locations of hosting NPM packages. |
| 145 | +In these situations it may then be possible to "just drop a script tag" in a few |
| 146 | +locations to get `--no-modules` working with NPM packages. It's unclear how |
| 147 | +viable this is, though. |
| 148 | +
|
| 149 | +# Rationale and Alternatives |
| 150 | +[alternatives]: #rationale-and-alternatives |
| 151 | +
|
| 152 | +When developing this RFC, some guiding values for its design have been |
| 153 | +articulated: |
| 154 | +
|
| 155 | +- Development on Rust-generated WebAssembly projects should allow developers to |
| 156 | + use the development environment they are most comfortable with. Developers |
| 157 | + writing Rust should get to use Rust, and developers using JavaScript should |
| 158 | + get to use a JS based runtime environment (Node.js, Chakra, etc). |
| 159 | +
|
| 160 | +- JavaScript tooling and workflows should be usable with Rust-generated |
| 161 | + WebAssembly projects. For example, bundlers like WebPack and Parcel, or |
| 162 | + dependency management tools such as `npm audit` and GreenKeeper. |
| 163 | +
|
| 164 | +- When possible, decisions should be made that allow the solution to be |
| 165 | + available to developers of not just Rust, but also C, and C++. |
| 166 | +
|
| 167 | +- Decisions should be focused on creating workflows that allow developers an |
| 168 | + easy learning curve and productive development experience. |
| 169 | +
|
| 170 | +These principles lead to the above proposal of using `package.json` to declare |
| 171 | +NPM dependencies which is then grouped together by `wasm-bindgen` to be |
| 172 | +published by `wasm-pack`. By using `package.json` we get inherent compatibility |
| 173 | +with existing workflows like GreenKeeper and `npm install`. Additionally |
| 174 | +`package.json` is very well documented and supported throughout the JS ecosystem |
| 175 | +making it very familiar. |
| 176 | +
|
| 177 | +Some other alternatives to this RFC which have been ruled out are: |
| 178 | +
|
| 179 | +* **Using `Cargo.toml` instead of `package.json`** to declare NPM dependencies. |
| 180 | + For example we could use: |
| 181 | +
|
| 182 | + ```toml |
| 183 | + [package.metadata.npm.dependencies] |
| 184 | + foo = "0.1" |
| 185 | + ``` |
| 186 | +
|
| 187 | + This has the drawback though of being incompatible with all existing workflows |
| 188 | + around `package.json`. Additionally it also highlights a discrepancy between |
| 189 | + NPM and Cargo and how `"0.1"` as a version requirement is interpreted (e.g. |
| 190 | + `^0.1` or `~0.1`). |
| 191 | + |
| 192 | +* **Adding a separate manifest file** instead of using `package.json` is also |
| 193 | + possibility and might be easier for `wasm-bindgen` to read and later |
| 194 | + parse/include. This has a possible benefit of being scoped to exactly our use |
| 195 | + case and not being misleading by disallowing otherwise-valid fields of |
| 196 | + `package.json`. The downside of this approach is the same as `Cargo.toml`, |
| 197 | + however, in that it's an unfamiliar format to most and is incompatible with |
| 198 | + existing tooling without bringing too much benefit. |
| 199 | + |
| 200 | +* **Annotating version dependencies inline** could be used rather than |
| 201 | + `package.json` as well, such as: |
| 202 | + |
| 203 | + ```rust |
| 204 | + #[wasm_bindgen(module = "foo", version = "0.1")] |
| 205 | + extern "C" { |
| 206 | + // ... |
| 207 | + } |
| 208 | + ``` |
| 209 | + |
| 210 | + As with all other alternatives this is incompatible with existing tooling, but |
| 211 | + it's also not aligned with Rust's own mechanism for declaring dependencies |
| 212 | + which separates the location for version information and the code iteslf. |
| 213 | + |
| 214 | +# Unresolved Questions |
| 215 | +[unresolved]: #unresolved-questions |
| 216 | + |
| 217 | +* Is the MVP restriction of only using `dependencies` too limiting? Should more |
| 218 | + fields be supported in `package.json`? |
0 commit comments