I know this will never happen until at least ES9 (and this is highly
optimistic) because of compat issues, but I was thinking: would separating
the core standard library into modules be a good idea?
I have a repo containing my idea in a little more detail here (
This was originally a part of the modules design but was cut due to timing.
You can find what did exist on the topic here:
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:modules_standard
- Matthew Robb
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Isiah Meadows impinb...@gmail.com wrote:
I know this will
From: es-discuss [mailto:es-discuss-boun...@mozilla.org] On Behalf Of Isiah
Meadows
I know this would break a lot of backwards compatibility completely, so this
is purely hypothetical, and I expect this to not have a realistic chance
anytime soon.
Anything that breaks backward
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 9:04 AM, Domenic Denicola
dome...@domenicdenicola.com wrote:
From: es-discuss [mailto:es-discuss-boun...@mozilla.org] On Behalf Of Isiah
Meadows
I know this would break a lot of backwards compatibility completely, so this
is purely hypothetical, and I expect this to
Brendan Eich wrote:
'with' to whither away
Rats, my fingers betrayed my punning brain.
We could hope for 'with' to wither away. Or 'whith' to whither away.
Gonna pronounce `with` using voiced glottal fricative from now on.
/be
___
es-discuss
@Brendan I'm aware of that pattern. For now, I'm more concerned about the
option of modules. It would be nice to import the standard library features
you need, and if, for some reason, one of the API natives get overwritten,
you have a fallback.
On Sep 22, 2014 1:18 PM, Brendan Eich
Transitioning the native API to modules is more of a proposed long term
goal of this proposal. It'll take years to fully realize.
On Sep 22, 2014 3:10 PM, Isiah Meadows impinb...@gmail.com wrote:
@Brendan I'm aware of that pattern. For now, I'm more concerned about the
option of modules. It
With libraries like Knockout utilizing 'with', I'm not sure it'll go away
anytime soon.
Also, withering works in two directions - we now have '__proto__' everywhere.
On 22 בספט׳ 2014, at 20:17, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org wrote:
Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
OnMon, Sep 22, 2014 at 9:04 AM,
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Benjamin Grurnbaum ing...@gmail.com wrote:
With libraries like Knockout utilizing 'with', I'm not sure it'll go away
anytime soon.
Adding monocle mustache to a future ES might help with getting rid of it. ;)
Nathan
Not deprecated -- any reason you brought it up in the context of 'with'?
/be
John Barton wrote:
Is __proto__ deprecated by TC39? The spec says otherwise.
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Isiah Meadows wrote:
Transitioning the native API to modules is more of a proposed long
term goal of this proposal. It'll take years to fully realize.
True, and I don't see a shortcut. Do you?
Having TC39 rush something designed by champions and ratified by
committee but without any
Hi,
Just to set some expectations, Although I follow es-discuss, I read more
than I discuss. So the point I want to achieve with this e-mail is:
I have played with dart since it was in alpha. And I also have been coding
with --harmony for a while. I would like to comment that arrow functions in
My point was that I don't believe that putting the standard library in modules
would help with people using the current library. Even in 5 years.
I mentioned __proto__ as an example for something that didn't go away although
it wasn't supported by a major browser and wasn't specced (to the
Please show an example of the code you're using __proto__ in. I'm sure it can be rewritten with Object.setPrototypeOf. 23.09.2014, 01:46, "Jasper St. Pierre" jstpie...@mecheye.net:I have used __proto__ simply because it allows for a feature nothing else has: to change the [[Prototype]] of a
I honestly don't know if generators should show up as `[function* name]` or
`[generator name]` when it comes to native, if there will ever be one, but
you better leave `toString` as method name alone 'cause it's implicitly
called any time you ('' + obj)` ... example:
A way to start would add new built-ins only in modules.
jjb
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Isiah Meadows impinb...@gmail.com wrote:
Transitioning the native API to modules is more of a proposed long term
goal of this proposal. It'll take years to fully realize.
On Sep 22, 2014 3:10 PM,
Until modules are shipping in engines we will have to continue to add
globals.
On Sep 22, 2014 8:03 PM, John Barton johnjbar...@google.com wrote:
A way to start would add new built-ins only in modules.
jjb
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Isiah Meadows impinb...@gmail.com
wrote:
As per http://www.2ality.com/2014/09/es6-modules-final.html
http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.2ality.com%2F2014%2F09%2Fes6-modules-final.htmlsa=Dsntz=1usg=AFQjCNHrAwyLFF0tL0Lfh38xylgEjmgB2g,
import * is back (but not in the spec) but I didn't see any discussion
about mitigating the
import * as m from './file.js'
Imports module instance object. It only creates one binding, m in the
example above.
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 9:31 PM, John Lenz concavel...@gmail.com wrote:
As per http://www.2ality.com/2014/09/es6-modules-final.html
ah, thanks. That makes more sense.
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Erik Arvidsson erik.arvids...@gmail.com
wrote:
import * as m from './file.js'
Imports module instance object. It only creates one binding, m in the
example above.
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 9:31 PM, John Lenz
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 8:17 PM, Erik Arvidsson erik.arvids...@gmail.com
wrote:
Until modules are shipping in engines we will have to continue to add
globals.
Honestly, I think an interim solution makes the most sense. Perhaps as
simple as a single namespace for adding new standard lib
21 matches
Mail list logo
