Module system strawpersons

ihab.awad at ihab.awad at
Fri Jan 15 09:18:58 PST 2010

Hi Kam,

My proposal is attempting to present two alternative ways to implement
"require" on top of the "import" keyword. The first option, as you
point out:

On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 9:13 AM, kkasravi <kkasravi at> wrote:
> Within the Layered systems, the wrapper require looks like
> require('util/pointUtils')

needs "require" itself to be recognized as a special form in the input
language, which involves parsing the input code. The second form:

> However the proposal also suggests that require could be
> require(import 'util/pointUtils')

does not, and as you point out:

> Since import 'util/pointUtils' returns a Function Object and require needs a
> string literal, I'm wonder how the second require (above) would work.

the second "require" would not comply with the existing CommonJS
"require", but would be close to it.


Ihab A.B. Awad, Palo Alto, CA

More information about the es-discuss mailing list