TypeScript: Jimp types are not corresponding to Jimp implementation

Expected Behavior

When importing Jimp as described in the doc for a TypeScript project:

import Jimp from 'jimp'

I should be able to use Jimp directly as is:

Jimp
  .read(fileData)
  .then((image: any) => {
    ...
  })
  .catch((err: any) => {
    ...
  })

Current Behavior

The compile step is OK, but there is runtime error saying:

TypeError: Cannot read property 'read' of undefined

If I use the require-like import syntax:

import * as Jimp from 'jimp'

and use Jimp as below:

Jimp
  .read(fileData)
  .then((image: any) => {
    ...
  })
  .catch((err: any) => {
    ...
  })

I then have a compile error saying:

Property 'read' does not exist on type 'typeof import("/path/to/node_modules/jimp/types/ts3.1/index")'

If I disable manually type checking for Jimp:

// @ts-ignore
Jimp
  .read(fileData)
  .then((image: any) => {
    ...
  })
  .catch((err: any) => {
    ...
  })

There is no runtime error and Jimp works as expected.

Failure Information (for bugs)

Context

• Jimp Version: 0.8.4
• Operating System: macOS 10.15 Catalina
• Node version: 10.16.3
• NPM Version: 6.11.3
• TypeScript Version: 3.6.3

Workaround

To use Jimp with types information, I have to import the types separately and bind them to the classic require syntax:

import Jimp from 'jimp'
// tslint:disable-next-line: no-var-requires
const jimp: Jimp = require('jimp')

And then, use “jimp” instead of “Jimp”:

jimp
  .read(fileData)
  .then((image: any) => {
    ...
  })
  .catch((err: any) => {
    ...
  })

[crutchcorn]

Are y’all able to test against 0.9.2 stable release. There was some work done to improve TS stability and should fix everyone’s issues with typings (if you were one of the ones that had to revert to 0.6.4, this includes you). Please test against and confirm/deny crosses fingers

[crutchcorn]

Oh gotcha I see what you’re up to! Love what you’ve been able to do thus far. If we’re able to get some stuff into our type tests, I’d appreciate that as well! I think once you have more tweaks (as you’d mentioned, I didn’t have any notes at a first glance), I’ll be able to review the PR today and we can probably get it moved forward.

Thanks so much for jumping in and helping! 😄