I would like to ask this again, in more depth than on twitter <https://twitter.com/leichtgewicht/status/773348056775266304> ...
The ES6 module support proposal of Node-eps currently states <https://github.com/nodejs/node-eps/blob/master/002-es6-modules.md#51-determining-if-source-is-an-es-module> : > *Note: While the ES2015 specification does not forbid > <http://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/6.0/#sec-forbidden-extensions> > this > extension, Node wants to avoid acting as a rogue agent.* > *Node has a TC39 representative, @bmeck <https://github.com/bmeck>, to > champion this proposal.* > *A specification change or at least an official endorsement of this Node > proposal would be welcomed.**If a resolution is not possible, this > proposal will fallback to the previous .mjs file extension proposal > <https://github.com/nodejs/node-eps/blob/5dae5a537c2d56fbaf23aaf2ae9da15e74474021/002-es6-modules.md#51-determining-if-source-is-an-es-module>.* Unambiguous ES6 module support is imho <https://github.com/nodejs/node-eps/pull/39#issuecomment-245157827>: ... an embarrassingly simple solution that would fix a major problem by > creating a little effort for a minority of users and makes everyone's life > better. ... so: What is the problem for the TC39 to doing the endorse this effort? best regards Martin Heidegger P.S.: I have noted in a write-up of the ES6 module for Node.js integration that this would be important http://es2015-node.js.org/#changing-the-es2015-specification P.P.S.: Thanks to Matthew Phillips <https://twitter.com/matthewcp/status/773351980068638720> for pointing me to es-discuss.
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
