feat: add parserConfig option

[ArnaudBarre]

Fixes #182

I didn't go with the classic include/exclude because this allow to return parser object and giving full control for the user at very low cost

[sapphi-red]

LGTM 👍

[bluwy]

Personally I'd still lean on include/exclude for consistency and the easier migration from plugin-react. Plus, perhaps one would want the filter function to return more plugin options in the future? Also thinking about Rolldown, there's a chance we could be passing raw glob strings or regex in its API to minimize native<->js calls like esbuild?

[ArnaudBarre]

My opinion was always to wait the maximum to add this kind of option so when implementing in native we don't need complex configuration and can rely on "standards". This is theoretically nice to be able to switch the config on a per file basis, but once you once used esbuild to bundle a complete React codebase without any plugins you feel the cost of being outside of standards and I want to help people be on the right track for sub-second bundle of real world codebases

[XantreDev]

I also would like to have an opportunity to use swc for deps to unblock usage of swc plugins

[bluwy]

@ArnaudBarre I think that's a fair goal when introducing new options. But if we're introducing a new option that's almost identical to how the ecosystem already implements it, I think it's better to reach directly to it. If we waited for the maximum, we'd have to deprecate filter and introduce a migration path which isn't quite nice 🤔

Re-reading the changes, perhaps an option named parserConfig would fit better? filter for me implies returning a boolean. Also if the API is used, you'd also have to manually replicate the existing TS/MDX handling, is that intentional?

[ArnaudBarre]

Yes this is intentional so that it can act as an exclude at the same time and gives you back immediately full control for people that want to oup-out of the default without being complex in the code for us. I'm ok for changing the name so that it's doesn't mislead people that this is can predicate callback

[bluwy]

If others are ok I'd prefer renaming the option then 👍 It would also be nice to mention that they need to re-define the config for general TSX/MDX files etc too with this option.

[sapphi-red]

Renaming the option to prevent misleading sounds good to me.