Because it's been reserved syntax since JavaScript's inception, and System hasn't.
I'd recommend some light reading before attempting to continue arguing: https://mathiasbynens.be/notes/reserved-keywords On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 12:53 AM, Dmitrii Dimandt <[email protected]> wrote: > But you can’t `var x = import`, for example. I guess you can’t `var import > = {}` either. > > Hmmm… I wonder why… > > > > On Fri, 04 Aug 2017 at 09:50 Jordan Harband <Jordan Harband > <jordan+harband+%[email protected]%3E>> wrote: > >> It can't be made syntax, because `var System = {};` is valid code, and we >> can't break the web. (seriously) >> >> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 12:31 AM, Dmitrii Dimandt <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Make “System” syntax, and there you go. >>> >>> Instead we have multiple ad-hoc random additions to random keywords just >>> because someone needs something and since there are rarely any long-term >>> design decisions anymore, we’re stuck with new.target, function.sent, >>> import.meta (add your own) >>> >>> Seriously. How is new.target is “syntax that has context information”, >>> but System.whatever cannot be provided with context information because >>> it’s API? >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, 04 Aug 2017 at 09:26 Jordan Harband <Jordan Harband >>> <jordan+harband+%[email protected]%3E>> wrote: >>> >>>> > There’s nothing stopping you from providing context to System.load. >>>> Or Loader.import, or… >>>> >>>> Those are APIs. It is, in fact, impossible to provide context with API, >>>> since it's just normal functions - it must be with syntax. >>>> >>>> Additionally, please don't use sexual language, especially in a >>>> derogatory manner - that's against TC39's code of conduct, and I'm quite >>>> sure it won't be tolerated on this list. >>>> >>>> Criticism that's purely insult, and doesn't actually explain the cons >>>> of something, is also not productive or useful. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> es-discuss mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >>>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 12:20 AM, Gil Tayar <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Myself, and tens of programmers I know, use ES6 modules (and their >>>>> precursors, CommonJS modules) for years now and can't even believe there >>>>> was a time when they didn't exist, given that they have totally >>>>> transformed >>>>> (in a good way) the way we work. And that is also the vibe I am getting >>>>> from the community (twitter, blog posts, meetups, etc). So when you say >>>>> that modules are "redundant and unnecessary on the server-side. and >>>>> [...]continue to fail to solve an relevant pain-point for everyday >>>>> programmers on the frontend-side now", I believe you are not talking about >>>>> myself or about the community I surround myself with. >>>>> >>>>> - Gil Tayar >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 9:47 AM kai zhu <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> > I’m curious what the concerns were. You mentioned disliking the >>>>>> syntax, but I’m guessing there’s more to it than that? >>>>>> >>>>>> the concern is that es modules are starting to look like a solution >>>>>> in search of a problem. its redundant and unnecessary on the >>>>>> server-side. >>>>>> and it continues to fail to solve an relevant pain-point for everyday >>>>>> programmers on the frontend-side now, or in the foreseeable future, while >>>>>> creating new ones. >>>>>> >>>>>> > I’ve been experimenting with ES Modules over HTTP 2 for a few >>>>>> months. I used rollup to create my dep graph without actually bundling, >>>>>> then served requested modules as entry points with a server push for >>>>>> their >>>>>> deps. I imagine that it won’t be long brolefore generic tooling for this >>>>>> sort of approach emerges (my own solution is pretty hacky, just wanted to >>>>>> see how it might work). >>>>>> >>>>>> for most projects, dep-graph and tree-shaking have marginal benefits >>>>>> in frontend programming, given their complexity. for all that extra work >>>>>> and boilerplate, the result is typically not anymore smaller, more >>>>>> efficient, or more maintainable than a pre-es6 rollup file. >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> es-discuss mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> es-discuss mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> > >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
