I am trying to stay outside this discussion as much as I can but there is a
specific sentence that I'd like to understand:
On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 8:39 AM, John Barton <johnjbar...@google.com> wrote:
>
> The ES5-module using community tried, valiantly, to reach a compromise
> module solution. They were not successful.
>
how 80K modules mentioned by Domenic, the concrete adoption of CommonJS or
the usage of Browserify for most of the web, can be defined exactly a
failure?
I am not sure ES6 modules have been overlooked since the beginning but I
believe that the rest of "the real-world" in production out there will keep
doing just fine with current inline or AMD based `require("module")` logic.
A new ES6 syntax, unfortunately unable to be brought over a UML (Unified
Module Loader) as it has done before, will also take much longer to became
a de-facto standard as `require` has become these days.
Here probably the "community" sentiment Domenic mentioned, everyone I know
somehow applauded fat arrow, nobody I know reacted differently from
"WTF?!?" about ES6 modules.
That being said, as complex and powerful APIs can be wrapped and brought to
simpler libraries, maybe we actually will keep using `require` but with
`import ES6 from "module"` behind the scene so everyone might win?
Best Regards
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
