> No worries - the examples page is very useful.
>
> In your original email:
> module Even = "http://example.com/even.js";;
> module Odd = "http://example.com/odd.js";;
>
> Is the load keyword missing:
> module Even = load "http://example.com/even.js";;
Yes, sorry for another inconsistency there. FWIW, I'm not married to that
particular syntax. I put the "load" keyword into the proposal just to emphasize
that these strings correspond to a compile-time action (loading the bits). For
example, consider:
module M = load "http://example.com/foo.js";;
module N = load "http://example.com/foo.js";;
These two modules are loaded from the exact same MRL, but the module system
treats them as two completely separate, independent modules. (Even custom
module loaders shouldn't be able to change this fact, since all they can do is
deliver the bits of a module resource.)
The reason for this is that on the web, there's just no way to know that two
URL's point to the "same" resource-- fetching the bit-for-bit-same URL even
microseconds apart can result in completely different data, since web servers
are free to deliver whatever they want. So the module loading semantics is
resolutely non-clever about interpreting MRL's.
Dave
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
