Minimal Module System Proposal

[Kevin Smith]

> Thanks, but let's not jump to any conclusions. I'm the champion of modules
> and wasn't even able to be a part of the discussion for family reasons. We
> can't make any judgment about the status of modules, or plans for reacting
> to the status of modules, before I've had a chance to be a part of the
> conversation.
>
>
 +1 and congrats (I'm slinging a babe right now ; )

I'm confident that modules will make it - in my mind ES6 will fail if not.
 They are certainly more important than proxies and private names, and the
sooner we coalesce around the syntax, the better everyone will feel.  IMO,
your previous proposal was almost right on.  e.g.

http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:modules&rev=1332511079
https://gist.github.com/khs4473/4382710

I think we need to have a knock-down-drag-out discussion about URL and
loader semantics.  ; )

{ Kevin }
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20130207/22eddb5c/attachment.html>