Modules feedback, proposal

John J Barton johnjbarton at
Sun Apr 1 09:20:18 PDT 2012

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 6:30 PM, David Herman <dherman at> wrote:

> >
> > baseUrl + ID + ".js"
> Yeah, I've thought about auto-appending ".js". I think you're right that
> it opens up the possibility to be a little more abstract.

Auto-appending makes the API less abstract:the arguments must be JS. That
in turn requires some new type-signaling string to opt out of JS if you
want to expand the loader to other kinds of dependents. RequireJS uses a
type-signaling prefix, 'text!notJS' and it has different rules for things
that end do or do not end in  '.js'. All of this has value at the cost of
complexity. I'd like to see the standard file extension naming used by

In the code:
  System.load(["jquery.js", "underscore.js"], function ($, _) {})
the string "jquery.js" and "underscore.js" are combined with path info to
create URLs. They identifies a resource, not a module; they should hew to
standard URL naming conventions. (The tokens $ and _ refer to modules).

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list