Saleem,

I had a little time to experiment with mundle tonight. It's interesting and
shows promise, but I have some significant concerns. I'd be interested in
your perspective on them:

   1. Modules are loaded using XMLHttpRequest, which immediately brings up
   cross-domain concerns. Only pages on the same protocol and exact hostname
   will be able to load these modules without adding JSONP or CORS support.
   2. When a module is requested, the payload returned is JSON containing
   strings of code which are eval'ed. If you didn't already know, eval is
   evil. But even more troubling is that code loaded this way doesn't show up
   in the WebKit inspector (without using @sourceURL), thus hard to debug, set
   breakpoints, trace, etc.

I see room for a tool like mundle, as it solves some problems other loaders
do not. But either one of the concerns above is enough for me to move on. I
suggest that you read this link carefully, as it explains these issues
better than I can:
http://requirejs.org/docs/why.html#5

I recommend you consider making the following improvements:

   1. To get around the cross-domain issues, load modules by injecting a
   script tag into the <head> instead of using an AJAX call. A simple example
   of doing this can be found in the $script loader (see
   https://github.com/ded/script.js/ ). More complex implementations, such
   as YepNope, allow scripts to be loaded concurrently in any order, but
   executed in the specific order you desire. This is done by loading scripts
   as an image and letting the browser cache them, then loading them again
   from cache as JS in the correct order to execute them.
   2. Have the server combine modules into a regular Javascript file, not a
   JSON file. You have an advantage that most loaders do not - there is a
   server-side component! So use it to build and wrap the raw modules with the
   correct "exports" context and so forth.
   3. Word of advice: you will get more interest if mundle was written in
   Javascript, not Coffeescript. Most developers I know want critical
   components (such ast their loader) to be pure JS. I have nothing
   against Coffeescript myself, and have used it on some projects. But I
   believe it is something better suited for building your custom application,
   not general purpose tools such as a loader.

Lastly, I created a pull request to fix an issue when loading mundle
modules from an HTTPS server. I found that all modules were loaded via HTTP
only, even if the current page is HTTPS. Here's the fix:
https://github.com/meelash/Mundlejs/pull/17

I hope this helps!

Tauren



On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Oliver Leics <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thursday, January 3, 2013 6:44:54 PM UTC+1, Saleem Abdul Hamid wrote:
>
>> Aren't there plenty of successful os projects with GPL? Is there any
>> reason why it doesn't work in the node community, besides what everyone
>> else is doing? Are there a majority of commercial project using node?
>>
>
> Latest discussion:
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/nodejs/5xxD2c4UfK8
>
>  --
> Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/
> Posting guidelines:
> https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "nodejs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
>

-- 
Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/
Posting guidelines: 
https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "nodejs" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en

Reply via email to