Oh, my bad, didn't now that js parser enables writing code like this :)

But still: its an unusual approach and don't feels like javascript. It also
forces to organize the code on some way.

Sorry, I prefer to use some commonjs apis, as long as we don't have native
module system, which is in work.

2011/1/22 Andrew Stein <[email protected]>

> You can take your Methadone code and run it in any JS environment
> without preprocessing or async script loading.  That's the whole
> point.
>
>
> On Jan 21, 5:30 pm, Oleg Slobodskoi <[email protected]> wrote:
> > What I mean is if you can't take your methadone code and run in any js
> env.
> > without preprocessing. Using any commonjs loader like requirejs +
> wrapping
> > your code in AMD enables you that.
> >
> > All stuff needed f.e. by requirejs can be added by preprocessor
> > automatically. Thats what I am working on.
> >
> > Modules itself a written in normal js, no one line extra to get it
> running
> > in any commonjs system.
> >
> > I think you should post it in nodejs group, jsmentors is more about
> > javascript itself, then about dependencies management and nodejs.
> >
> > 2011/1/21 Andrew Stein <[email protected]>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Thanks, Garrett - I'll fix those.
> >
> > > On Jan 21, 3:51 pm, Oleg Slobodskoi <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > Nice to see people have the same problems like me :)
> >
> > > > I am working on a similar module, it is not ready yet, but I would
> like
> > > to
> > > > give you my opinion about methadone.
> >
> > > > 1. The most bad part is you class like declarations. At this point
> you
> > > are
> > > > completely changing the way to write javascript, don't do it!
> > > > 2. Loader - there already some really good commonjs loader out of
> there,
> > > > f.e. requirejs, you should use one of them!
> > > > 3. Unneeded preprocessor - if you want to have a small footprint of
> js
> > > and
> > > > css, you SHOULD preprocess your files with minifier, because they
> > > optimize a
> > > > lot!  So due to the fact we HAVE to do preprocessing, wrapping
> modules
> > > with
> > > > AMD is not a problem at all. There are also a lot of other stuff we
> can
> > > > nicely preprocess:
> > >https://github.com/kof/node-ams/tree/master/lib/processors
> >
> > > > About my project node-ams:
> >
> > > > 1. it is is build tool
> > > > 2. it is dependecies detector with purpose to combine files
> > > > 3. it is easy extendable preprocessing tool
> > > > 4. it is static file server
> >
> > > > 2011/1/21 Andrew Stein <[email protected]>
> >
> > > > > My employer, Benchmark Solutions, has released this open source
> > > > > framework y'all may enjoy:
> >
> > > > >https://github.com/benchmark-solutions/methadone
> >
> > > > > It introduces declarative Modules & Classes into Javascript through
> > > > > some overloaded labels & runtime code reflection (though the code
> > > > > reflection can also be run in advance on the server ...),
> essentially
> > > > > amounting to a small DSL for static dependency analysis &
> > > > > namespacing.
> >
> > > > > Though there are many frameworks available for this, we felt there
> was
> > > > > nothing which satisfied everything we wanted:
> >
> > > > > 1) Does not load scripts via XHR or document.write("<script ... "),
> as
> > > > > we feel that these types of loading tricks obscure the debugging
> > > > > process & make writing reusable libraries tied to a specific
> > > > > implementation.
> > > > > 2) Does not require a separate preprocessor, code transformation or
> > > > > compilation step to run in the browser - though powerful, we wanted
> > > > > the code you see in the browser to be the exact same code you wrote
> in
> > > > > your IDE.
> > > > > 3) Has a clean API that doesn't "get in the way" of how you already
> > > > > write javascript - a framework that provides a class construct
> > > > > shouldn't reinvent the wheel with regards to Javascript's existing
> > > > > prototype system.
> >
> > > > > There are some existing bugs and questionable design decisions, but
> we
> > > > > would love constructive feedback from the community!
> >
> > > > > --
> > > > > To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman
> list:
> > > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
> >
> > > > > To search via a non-Google archive, visit here:
> > > > >http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
> >
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > [email protected]<jsmentors%[email protected]>
> <jsmentors%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups .com>
> > > <jsmentors%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups .com>
> >
> > > > --
> > > > regards,
> > > > Oleg @oleg008
> > > > github.com/kof
> >
> > > Sorry, I'm a little confused as to your first point.  Methadone's
> > > Class definitions are annotated, but otherwise the verbatim pattern
> > > for Javascript constructor declaration - what makes this different
> > > from the same declaration with no annotations?
> >
> > > When I say that Methadone aspires to "not get in the way" of your
> > > javascript coding, I specifically meant to call out frameworks like
> > > RequireJS which necessitate parameter based module definitions &
> > > introduce their special notion of script loading as a dependency to
> > > your library.  Methadone does neither of these things, letting you
> > > write essentially straight Javascript w/ some annotations, without
> > > making any assertions about how you should preprocess, minify or load
> > > your application.  Enabling this sort of functionality with the same
> > > ease of which you would include JQuery or Underscore is the ongoing
> > > justification for its development.
> >
> > > Minifying, preprocessing directives, parallel async script loading -
> > > these are all great features - and yet totally irrelevant to providing
> > > declarative modules & namespacing to Javascript.  If you want these
> > > things in your application, you can use them alongside Methadone
> > > without issue.
> >
> > > --
> > > To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list:
> > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
> >
> > > To search via a non-Google archive, visit here:
> > >http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
> >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > [email protected]<jsmentors%[email protected]>
> <jsmentors%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups .com>
> >
> > --
> > regards,
> > Oleg @oleg008
> > github.com/kof
>
> --
> To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
>
> To search via a non-Google archive, visit here:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]<jsmentors%[email protected]>
>



-- 
regards,
Oleg @oleg008
github.com/kof

-- 
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

To search via a non-Google archive, visit here: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]

Reply via email to