Hi Felipe, thanks for the reply.

I got curious about your answer and I wen to search a bit and here’s what I found:
In theory, the express function is declared at the types with:

declare function e(): core.Express;

but at the same time it has the export at the end of the file

Also, at the same time the same file has

import * as qs from "qs";

and at the types definition and regarding your comment, they should be using require as well.

I am used to avoid using require when working with Typescript by practice and that was the first time that I got a bit concerned when should I change it or not, because even in the Typescript website its not completely clear if it is a bad practice or

https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/modules.html#import

Then I got not so much clear answers here:

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/35706164/typescript-import-as-vs-import-require

and here

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/29596714/new-es6-syntax-for-importing-commonjs-amd-modules-i-e-import-foo-require/29598404#29598404

and here

https://2ality.com/2014/09/es6-modules-final.html

from this last one:

If you require a library in CommonJS, you get back an object:

var lib = require('lib');
lib.someFunc(); // property lookup

Thus, accessing a named export via lib.someFunc means you have to do a property lookup, which is slow, because it is dynamic.

In contrast, if you import a library in ES6, you statically know its contents and can optimize accesses:

import * as lib from 'lib';
lib.someFunc(); // statically resolved

===

That all said, I would be glad to read more about the correct pattern in a case that you have an official link to share.

Thanks again for reading and commenting the post

Best regards,