@wycats This should be titled "ES6 Modules".
-
-
-
@dummy12861286 Most people don't know what version of JavaScript they're using or what ECMAScript is. :) -
@dummy12861286 Heading says "The next version of JavaScript comes with a module system heavily inspired by Node.js modules" (next version) -
@wycats Doesn't make it ok. ES6 might be a dud that nobody adopts. Just be honest and specific with the title. -
@dummy12861286 I'm a little confused by what you're saying. JS is a language. This is a feature of the next version. -
@wycats Other standards bodies try to advance a language and sometimes people don't give a shit (e.g. C). It's up to the implementors.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@wycats cjs needs consumer-side examples. -
@domenic All of the modules I use have consumption, but I can write specific examples for consuming these precise modules. Seems good? -
@wycats yeah showing how consumer side must match producer side is key I think -
-
@domenic The matching problem is fundamental to the *semantics* of having named/default exports, not the JS syntax. -
@wycats Yes, I am aware it is fundamental to the semantics. I assumed this website was trying to explain semantics. -
@domenic It's fundamental to the semantics that JS copied from Node. For proof, look at mkdirp's exports. -
@wycats All I am saying is that you should illustrate that you cannot do mkdirp.sync, whereas in Node you can. - 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@wycats is this a proposal? Or real code? -
@levicook Real code based on the next version of JS. There's a transpiler at https://github.com/square/es6-module-transpiler … -
@wycats neat. Thank you. Any brave souls using it in production? -
-
@wycats super. I'll kick the tires, though I'm generally happy with browserify these days.
End of conversation
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.