import ModuleSpecifier

[Mark Volkmann]

Are you saying that in the future each browser can have its own rule for
module specifier strings?

On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Domenic Denicola <d at domenic.me> wrote:

>  It is syntactically valid, but there is no specification for what the
> module specifier string should contain. Traceur has one rule, and if you’re
> using Traceur you need to follow Traceur’s rules. I’m sure other
> transpilers have their own chosen rules.
>
>
>
> In a hypothetical future where browsers have a module loader, they will
> have their own rule. Similarly, io.js will have its own.
>
>
>
> *From:* es-discuss [mailto:es-discuss-bounces at mozilla.org] *On Behalf Of *Mark
> Volkmann
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 31, 2015 17:21
> *To:* es-discuss at mozilla.org
> *Subject:* import ModuleSpecifier
>
>
>
> I was under the impression that the following is a valid import statement:
>
>
>
> import {something} from './somefile';
>
>
>
> I know this used to work in Traceur. However, in the latest version of
> Traceur I have to include a file extension like this for it to work:
>
>
>
> import {something} from './somefile.js';
>
>
>
> I don't see any place in the spec. where it describes whether
> ModuleSpecifier should include a file extension. Maybe I just missed it. Is
> Traceur correct to require it?
>
>
>
> --
>
> R. Mark Volkmann
>
> Object Computing, Inc.
>



-- 
R. Mark Volkmann
Object Computing, Inc.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20150531/64528956/attachment-0001.html>