Integrating the Webs' dependency systems

John Barton johnjbarton at google.com
Thu May 29 08:41:30 PDT 2014


On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 7:45 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk at annevk.nl> wrote:

> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 4:40 PM, John Barton <johnjbarton at google.com>
> wrote:
> > My intuition is that any such plan would be vigorously opposed by the JS
> > community. Or perhaps vigorously ignored: browsers are falling behind
> > current technology and are no longer in a position to dictate what JS
> means.
>
> I don't even know what this means. You are aware it's mostly browsers
> that are on TC39 right and drive JS implementation?
>

I mean that the nodejs community accounts for a significant and growing
fraction of the JS community. Its module capability has proven very
effective and that module capability sits at the center of its community.
Browsers, on the other hand, are in decline, having failed to respond to
the innovation demanded by the rise of mobile-first and generally mired in
efforts to create better designs rather than ship innovations. In my
opinion, JS developers, including those involve with or influencing TC39,
understand this situation and will not agree to yet another redesign of the
ES module system.  Some features could be cut; some could be added, but
overall its up to the browser to deal with the Loader not the other way
around.

I think the ES6 work plus module loading is exceptional engineering by
world class experts. But it will only count if it ships.

Just one opinion of course. Ask around.
jjb
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20140529/ce0193c1/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list