Hi Dave & Sam, First of all, this is an extremely well-written proposal and was a pleasure to read; thanks for putting it out there.
My first set of questions are not (at least, directly) about the first- or second-class nature of the modules as you propose them, but rather about the isolation model implicit. Within each Context, naming a module is equivalent to reaching a shared instance of it. This instance must be declared at the topmost scope of the importing module, so it is in some sense forced on the entire lexical scope of that module. This means that, to achieve isolation via lexical scopes, we _must_ use Contexts, implying the use of async APIs. What is the rationale for this? Another, related question is how you recommend linking in things like the standard libraries, wherein module names referring to code (internal linking) are in the same namespace as module names referring to powerful objects provided by the platform (external linking). Ihab -- Ihab A.B. Awad, Palo Alto, CA _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
