import ModuleSpecifier

John Barton johnjbarton at google.com
Mon Jun 1 14:20:32 UTC 2015


This same claim could be made about every item in ECMAScript.
Implementation variation in ModuleSpecifiers is no different from variation
in the allowed keywords, character set, or really anything a developer
types.  Failing to specify this aspect of the language makes no sense to
this developer at least.

On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 7:30 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.org> wrote:

> Browsers in any semi-competitive market will agree on a standard. I don't
> see why that needs to be called into doubt, even as part of a "hypothetical
> future" :-|. (Is there another kind? :-P)
>
> /be
>
> Domenic Denicola wrote:
>
>> Yes, in theory. However, browsers are more likely to wait until there’s a
>> standard for browser module loaders before shipping modules, in order to
>> avoid such divergent behavior.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20150601/22a7ac59/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list