4 ms·

I was under the impression HTTP/2 would make this concern irrelevant... but I'm no expert on the subject. I suppose its a valid point. I just don't see what th

I was under the impression HTTP/2 would make this concern irrelevant... but I'm no expert on the subject. I suppose its a valid point. I just don't see what the point in having support for additional js language features natively is if you're forced to use a tranpiler regardless. If you supported only, say, 50% of ES2016, and modules you could plausibly deliver unbundled native ES6; it'd be pretty cool; but modules aren't just a random feature from the pot; there is literally no serious modern web application that doesn't use them. So... I'm struggling to see the ES2016 feature complete map (without modules) as really meaningful for anyone, practically.

vmasto 10y ago
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.
- jakub_g 10y ago
  Minifying yes but why bundling? https://hpbn.co/http2/#request-and-response-multiplexing 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.
  - vmasto 10y ago
    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.htm http://engineering.khanacademy.org/posts/js-packaging-http2.... https://medium.com/@asyncmax/the-right-way-to-bundle-your-assets-for-faster-sites-over-http-2-437c37efe3ff#.sjb5wen8t https://medium.com/@asyncmax/the-right-way-to-bundle-your-as... https://medium.com/webpack/webpack-http-2-7083ec3f3ce6#.74q6ro5kl https://medium.com/webpack/webpack-http-2-7083ec3f3ce6#.74q6...
moron4hire 10y ago
Transpiling also drastically increases the size of code. Having these features natively could significantly reduce bundle size.

vmasto 10y ago

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.

jakub_g 10y ago
Minifying yes but why bundling? https://hpbn.co/http2/#request-and-response-multiplexing 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.
- vmasto 10y ago
  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.htm http://engineering.khanacademy.org/posts/js-packaging-http2.... https://medium.com/@asyncmax/the-right-way-to-bundle-your-assets-for-faster-sites-over-http-2-437c37efe3ff#.sjb5wen8t https://medium.com/@asyncmax/the-right-way-to-bundle-your-as... https://medium.com/webpack/webpack-http-2-7083ec3f3ce6#.74q6ro5kl https://medium.com/webpack/webpack-http-2-7083ec3f3ce6#.74q6...

moron4hire 10y ago

Transpiling also drastically increases the size of code. Having these features natively could significantly reduce bundle size.