On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 9:07 PM, James Burke <jrbu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I believe loader plugins are much more valuable to the end developer > than the possible advantages under the covers to compile time wiring. > (I hope this is related; if not, just erase this line and the two quoted above). Doesn't "Script-loader" make about as much sense as literal "XML HTTP Request"? Imagine how impoverished our Web App world would be if it had turned out that Ajax only supported valid XML. Shouldn't the API in http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:module_loaders be split into one layer that takes URL -> buffers and another that takes buffers -> modules? Then clever folks can do clever things with and between the two layers. jjb
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
