Modules, Concatenation, and Better Solutions
khs4473 at gmail.com
Wed Oct 17 17:47:43 PDT 2012
> I think we all agree that concatenation is not going away. In principle,
> it's the concatenator's fault if they do a non-semantics-preserving
> transformation. In practice, if getting the semantics-preserving
> transformation right is too hard, people will get it wrong, and it's our
> fault for making it too hard. So... I agree, don't worry. I just have stuff
> to work through that can't be done in a rapid-fire email conversation.
Cool - look forward to seeing what you come up with!
Just to bring the thread back around to where I started it, I would like to
just point out that there seems to be considerable consensus in the
community (*) that some kind of "packaging" scheme is desirable. (I use
the word "packaging" *very* loosely here.) The idea is that components are
more than just code sprites - they encompass stylesheets and images and
json configuration files and more. All of these have to be delivered
somehow, and it would be nice if we didn't have to use separate spriting
techniques for each. This probably goes beyond TC39, but if we could
address the problem at that level, then we wouldn't have to bend over
backwards to support these funky code sprites.
* Twitter's Bower: https://github.com/twitter/bower
* TJ's Component: https://github.com/component/component
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss