Hi Sebastian, I know Babel is kinda explicit but the way it's being promoted and described in every talk I see does not warn, does not talk about caveats, it's like developers don't want to see and believe there are no problems at all.
As example, if I write this code in the live transpiler, which is what developers show at conferences: ```js var o = {method: function () { return this; }}; console.log(::o.method); ``` I don't see warnings. Moreover, if I use syntax that might break because of core.js gotchas, I'd like to see warnings in there too. Babel might be the better place, doing a better analysis than a polyfill as core.js is, at recognizing potentially problematic patterns and warn about them too. For instance, every time I tell developers they cannot trust Symbols with Object.create(null) objects they go like: "uh???!" because they either didn't read Babel or core.js caveats section. Again, not saying it's your fault, I just think something more could be done (and not even that sure what exactly) Best Regards On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 5:25 PM, Sebastian McKenzie <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > In Babel all the experimental features are behind flags and the docs ( > http://babeljs.io/docs/usage/experimental/) are very explicit about their > status: > > > Subject to change > > These proposals are subject to change so use with extreme caution. Babel > may update without warning in order to track spec changes. > > Even the blog posts announcing new features ( > http://babeljs.io/blog/2015/05/14/function-bind/) have warnings at the > top: > > > Warning: This syntax is highly experimental and you should not use it > for anything serious (yet). If you do use this syntax, please provide > feedback on GitHub. > > So I’m curious to hear what suggestions you have to make this clearer. > > > > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 4:19 PM, Andrea Giammarchi < > andrea.giammar...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> not arguing or anything, and just as parenthesis, but this: >> >> On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Kevin Smith <zenpars...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Not sure you should use it in production, just yet... >>> >>> >> is what I keep seeing as pattern: >> >> 1. here: please try this but don't use in production since not standard >> (see transpilers early adoption, __proto__, etc) >> 2. ... developers write code regardless ... >> 3. too late to drop "that" since it's already in production out there >> >> I wish Babel or any other transpilers warned in red everything that does >> not come from standards, reminding that things could and probably will >> change, so that it's clear developers can test "at home" but not deploy >> (unless they truly know what they are doing or they are OK risking changes). >> >> Please don't get me wrong, I do like the :: proposal but the way it's >> going out, I'm not sure is the best we can do as TC39/developers >> collaboration. >> >> Best Regards >> >> >> >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss