> There's no invisible switch. You are assuming something not axiomatic: > that new syntax head-forms other than module must inherit sloppy from outer > code. That does not follow without more argumentation. >
I guess I'm saying that anything other than inheritance, without the pragma, is an invisible switch. I'm not sure what "pragma-haunts" means. Adding "use strict"; to > ClassElement sounds more like that, and I'm clearly arguing against! OK - good! > Who actually uses this or an equivalent? I see lots of code choosing one > or another module/package system but few attempts at dual interop. I > haven't see this in the field, but I'm not looking hard. > Esprima: https://github.com/ariya/esprima/blob/master/esprima.js Q: https://github.com/kriskowal/q/blob/master/q.js#L29 If you want your code to work in Node+AMD+Whatever that's what you're stuck with. This is all fun, but "ultimately" is a giveaway. Years from now, modules > uber alles, you bet. I'm arguing against coupled (multiplied) risk in the > near term. > I'm glad to be entertaining : ) And see your point about multiplied risk - I just don't think there's much risk of non-adoption of modules in the near term (year and a half?). { Kevin }
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
