Do Anonymous Exports Solve the Backwards Compatibility Problem?

Sam Tobin-Hochstadt samth at ccs.neu.edu
Thu Dec 20 11:51:03 PST 2012


On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 2:44 PM, James Burke <jrburke at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If that all of the above holds true (getting clarification on the
> Module Loader API is needed),

Just to clarify about the Module Loader API:

 - System.set/System.get are very much still a part of the design.  In
fact, the loader design has changed very little recently, despite the
revisions we recently presented to the static behavior of modules.
 - I agree with James that loader hooks/feature detection/System.set
are the right way to handle legacy compatibility.
 - I don't see what a mutable `exports` object would add on top of
this system, but maybe I'm not understanding what you're saying.

Finally, even though the syntax is `export = expression`, this is
semantically not an assignment, and there's no "export object" being
changed when things are written this way.

Sam


More information about the es-discuss mailing list