chore: add solid export condition to `@tanstack/solid-form`

[Brendonovich]

Solid relies on the solid export condition to perform a custom JSX transform depending on whether the code is being built for client or server, but @tanstack/solid-form only has dist/cjs and dist/esm, which are client-only since they import stuff like memo from solid-js/web (which is only available in client builds).

To fix this I've added tsc to the build of process of @tanstack/solid-form so that .js/.jsx files are emitted which solid can apply its custom JSX transform on. There's probably nicer ways of doing this that can integrate with vite but this is what I did to fix a similar problem for SolidStart.

[nx-cloud[bot]]

☁️ Nx Cloud Report

CI is running/has finished running commands for commit 80035f2cdac36103e90e0dedf5b8f7c461318832. As they complete they will appear below. Click to see the status, the terminal output, and the build insights.

📂 See all runs for this CI Pipeline Execution

---

✅ Successfully ran 1 target

• nx affected --targets=test:format,test:sherif,test:knip,test:eslint,test:lib,test:types,test:build,build --parallel=3

---

Sent with 💌 from NxCloud.

[crutchcorn]

@lachlancollins can you investigate this? We'd want this to integrate with Vite

Also CC @ryansolid if you have any guidance on how to do this (sorry for the ping Ryan)

[ryansolid]

This is pretty much correct. We want the source, but not necessarily the TypeScript so we tend to tsc it into dist folder. My only recommendation is build it into a .jsx entry file if there is any JSX anywhere in the solid implementation of the library. That way it will get processed properly.

[Brendonovich]

My only recommendation is build it into a .jsx entry file if there is any JSX anywhere in the solid implementation of the library. That way it will get processed properly.

This is probably true but having the entrypoint be .js seems to be working fine for us

[TheKnightCoder]

Is there anything blocking this from being merged? tanstack forms is unusable on solid without this

[crutchcorn]

@TheKnightCoder I'd like to see our build tooling unified to solve this problem before we merge. @lachlancollins any chance you could take another look into merging into Vite?

Alternatively, if you think this fine to publish as-is for now and refine later, we can

[crutchcorn]

Merging, per some research from @lachlancollins showing this should work now. Let us know if you run into additional problems around ESM/CJS support