On 5/28/15, 11:46 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I think GCC does handle ES5. And there is still active development on >>it. >> I’m definitely not a fan of their replacement of @expose with string >> literals, but is there some other minifier we want to use instead? > >GCC handles ES5 just fine. Their implementation of the ES6 -> ES5/3 >transpilation is coming along nicely. No need for polyfills. > >'@expose' wasn't replaced by string literals, to be sure. If anything >'replaced' it, it's a combination (either/or) of '@export' and >'@nocollapse'. But there certainly are situations where string >notation is easier - as it always was. And the benefit of deprecating >'@expose' is that the GCC can much more effectively optimize and >minimize the JS without it. Interesting. Lots of the advice I found suggested string literals. How are @expose and @export different such that it helps GCC? > >By the way, what do you plan to use instead of 'goog.inherit', and >why? I'm sorry if I missed some of the discussion in the past few >days... would you mind summarizing? I think folks want to use Object.create and other Object methods. -Alex
