Not saying JSX is something I like or not. I'm saying it isn't plausibly compatible. Also, a bit presumptuous to assume I don't see need or want to address it.
-
-
(for context, the issue isn't modes, it's how they compose. If you could never call an non-JSX-mode function or touch a non-JSX-mode object from JSX-mode, that *might* simplify some things, but nobody wants to live this way)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
s/As/Ask/ I'm the worst at this.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I'll help: they do not. My job for the last two years has been writing and running tests for features in JS engines, And I can tell you that new modes, especially ones introduce the new pragmas, are dead on arrival.
-
We shouldn't like these as users either. What if you want to use features in the decorators mode in jsx mode? At some point someone needs to work through how things fit together.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
& Web Standards TL; Blink API OWNER
Named PWAs w/
DMs open. Tweets my own; press@google.com for official comms.

Why!!!???
We put JS in HTML all the time. The big perf issue is that the parsers can't interop today, so HTML-on-top is most efficient by a country mile. JS-on-top w/o new syntax to integrate other types is going to continue to be slow and memory-inefficient.