State of discussion - module / Import syntax

Jussi Kalliokoski jussi.kalliokoski at
Mon Sep 24 10:02:03 PDT 2012

I find this interesting as well, because I've been thinking of creating Yet
Another(TM) module loader, which would be a standalone polyfill for Harmony

While we're at it, a few questions I've been wondering:
 * Is it possible to have modules that don't export *anything*? I suppose
this would allow existing scripts like jQuery to work out of the box, if
they tie their exports to the window object, then just do `import
"jquery.js"` or `import * from "jquery.js"` if necessary.
 * If there's a cross-compilation hook on the loader, does the dependency
resolving happen before or after the compilation? Former is more efficient,
but places constraints on the compile-to-JS languages.
 * Is there a way to do async cross-compilation with the hooks? e.g.
offload parsing and everything to a worker to keep the main thread
 * Is it possible to import things to local scope? For example, is this a
syntax error, and if not, what happens: `function x () { import y from x }`


On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Aron Homberg <info at> wrote:

> Hi all,
> I found that the recent draft / harmony PDF doesn't include a
> specification of the import syntax and
> just wanna ask if the following wiki pages in (harmony namespace) reflect
> the current state of discussion
> and if there are big changes to expect in the future regarding this:
> If it's relatively "stable" I would start prototyping the import syntax in
> my Traceur clone.
> Thanks and regards,
> Aron
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list