Huh, that's interesting Johan. It certainly makes sense; I manually deal with getting external stuff loaded in index.html in the right order, and only really use angular-filesort for the project code files. Doing it with a name convention takes some of the voodoo out of my gulp order, I will try it.
e On Wed Nov 19 2014 at 11:14:56 PM Johan <johan.steenk...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't see any benefit in using browserify unless, for some reason, you > want to use node modules. > > If you do want to control file load order, for example have the > flexibility to reuse a module across multiple files then you can use a > convention like filename [*].module.js contains the module setter and other > files using the corresponding module getter can be named [*].controller.js, > [*].directives.js or whaterver you prefer. > > You can then use gulp-order and specify the order of files in the pipe > using globs > > [ > '**/app.js', > '**/*.module.js', > '**/*.js' > ] > > There is no need to use gulp-angular-filesort which can not handle > separate files containing setter/getters. If you use explicit DI then you > do not need gulp-angular-filesort anyway. > > I have not added ES6/traceur in my code/build processing yet. However I'd > look at what the Angular team are doing in the router 2 project where they > are building with gulp, traceur etc. > https://github.com/angular/router > > > On Thursday, November 20, 2014 5:28:56 AM UTC+13, Eric Eslinger wrote: >> >> In order to build code that I think will make the 2.0 transition more >> smooth, I've been working on integrating traceur and ES6 stuff into my >> angular development. I've also split a fair bit of stuff into plain-old >> classes, treating my directive definitions and routing definitions as >> pretty much just act as a harness to wire angular into the relevant objects. >> >> I'm not using browserify at all in this workflow. I'm not sure it's >> needed; angular already has its own way to handle dependencies and stuff. >> I'm not sure how I would handle using require() style code inside angular's >> DI space. >> >> Has anyone in the list used Browserify with angular, in particular with >> es6ify / traceur? It seems handy, but I'm interested in figuring out >> whether it would reduce complexity or add complexity to the app structure. >> >> e >> >> PS: for the record, what I *am* doing is using gulp to pipe everything >> into traceur or coffee based on the file extension, then catting everything >> together, and minifying. The gulp-angular-filesort plugin is really helpful >> here, as it makes sure that the files in your stream are in the correct >> order to avoid module instantiation errors. >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "AngularJS" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to angular+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to angular@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/angular. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AngularJS" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to angular+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to angular@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/angular. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
