25 ms·
PLEASE don't do the awkward .mjs thing. I and prob most devs will simply not respect it.
by grifter2000 10y ago
PLEASE don't do the awkward .mjs thing. I and prob most devs will simply not respect it.
- pornel 10y ago.es sounds good to me. Seems like a good fit for EcmaScript. It might even help finally renaming the language, so that tech recruiters confuse it with something else ;)
- KMag 10y ago> so that tech recruiters confuse it with something else At least if a recruiter starts asking you about your Eczema experience, you can more easily determine that the screening process has gone off the rails.
- inglor 10y agoThat would be incorrect though, there are other implementations of the ES specification that are not JavaScript (UnityScript for example). Although it's a cute suggestion.
- greggman 10y agoWAT? UnityScript is not an implementation of ES AFAICT. It's entirely made up by Unity and has almost nothing in common with JavaScript/EMCAScript
- stupidcar 10y agoThat's up to the Node.js team, not the V8 team, right? But yes, Node.js team, please don't inflict .mjs on us, or let your extreme NIH block the introduction of ES2015 modules.
- grifter2000 10y agoRight, thank you
- ihsw 10y ago.js, .jsx, .mjs, what's next? .js8?
- zghst 10y agoExactly why we should avoid more extensions. I don't see what's wrong with a config, either package.json or System.global
- tracker1 10y agohttps://github.com/dherman/defense-of-dot-js/blob/master/proposal.md https://github.com/dherman/defense-of-dot-js/blob/master/pro... Though there may need to be some considerations for `exports`/`module.exports` vs the `export` directive.
- inglor 10y agoNode is an open project - why not argue against it there?