Saying ESM and CJS differ in ways that are problematic
.js is widespread and already has broad meaning. .mjs is an unnecessary version marker. Again, .js already means script *and* CJS
-
-
You say unecessary but I see real benefits to it, and real downsides to other approaches
-
I think we should try to come to agreement on at least the cost accounting here. If not, at least publicize the cost accounting diffs.
-
I would havs to dig through all those threads? What do you seek from this? We are shipping a PR for flagged in next month or so.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The more I talk about this the more I love .mjs. Also people will hate "use module" plenty too. Actual cost for Dx with mjs is TINY
-
You won't need that in any new ESM project. Just transitional.
-
I wrote down the list of concerns I have with .mjs in Defense of JS. doubt I'll beat that on Twitter.
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.