ECMAScript 2016+ in Firefox • Hacker News Board

Re: ECMAScript 2016+ in Firefox

#91

Post by vmasto » Fri, Feb 24, 2017, 1:20 AM UTC

jakub_g wrote: post #71

vmasto wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HTTP/2 won't make a serious difference in regards to that, bundling will always be required. Also minifying will always be required, so there's always going to be a build step anyway.

Minifying yes but why bundling? https://hpbn.co/http2/#request-and-response-multiplexing HTTP2 takes care of loading files via multiplexing, and ES6 modules take care of loading JS in proper order, no need to bundle AFAIU.

Sorry for the late reply. Multiplexing is not a panacea, there's still some overhead, and even if there wasn't there's still a point where you start to lose lot of performance by limiting gzip compression (the smaller the file the less efficient the compression is).

You can read more about why we'll always need a bundling step at the following links:

http://engineering.khanacademy.org/posts/js-packaging-http2....

https://medium.com/@asyncmax/the-right-way-to-bundle-your-as...

https://medium.com/webpack/webpack-http-2-7083ec3f3ce6#.74q6...

Re: ECMAScript 2016+ in Firefox

#92

Post by z3t4 » Fri, Feb 24, 2017, 6:06 AM UTC

bakkoting wrote: post #90

z3t4 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't know you could only export at the global scope. Wanted to show that you could do stupid, hard to analyze things in ES6 modules too. But maybe you can't !? Although I don't want a committee to not only decide what is stupid or not, but also hard code it into the spec so I can't do some things even if I have very good reasons to. Like being able to require modules locally to make the code easier to reason about,…

> Wanted to show that you could do stupid, hard to analyze things in ES6 modules too. But maybe you can't !? You can't, at least not in this way. A module's imported and exported names are statically determined. Of course, you can just export a single object, and then make that object arbitrarily complex depending on runtime behavior. > Like being able to require modules locally Not sure what this means.

locally: inside functions

Re: ECMAScript 2016+ in Firefox

#93

Post by u02sgb » Fri, Feb 24, 2017, 12:05 PM UTC

jakub_g wrote: post #72

mstade wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, but there's certainly an off-by-one joke in there somewhere. Since ES2015 the official nomenclature is ES , to convey that a new version of the standard is cut yearly. While this may result in somewhat underwhelming releases, like ES2016, at least it's much easier to reason about and target than previously. Case in point, it took ten years or so to get from ES3 to ES5, and another five-six years I believe…

We must stop using names like ES8 etc. right now , otherwise there'll be a lot of confusion in 4024 about which version of ES your customers' IE supports.

Surely we'll get there in 2020 or 2021, is that ES10, ES11 or ES20, ES21?

Edit: and yes I know you were joking :)