3 ms·
here; http://requirejs.org/docs/ http://requirejs.org/docs/ you can see all the smelling shit of requirejs there.
by combataircraft 14y ago
here; http://requirejs.org/docs/ http://requirejs.org/docs/
you can see all the smelling shit of requirejs there.
- cfjedimaster 14y agoThat's not really an answer. What _about_ their way of doing things do you consider to be wrong and why?
- wilmoore 14y agoCan you expound please?
- blessYAHU 14y agoA unbaised post comparing the two would be nice. Sounds like a post Addy Osmani would write. I found this post(http://blog.millermedeiros.com/amd-is-better-for-the-web-than-commonjs-modules/ http://blog.millermedeiros.com/amd-is-better-for-the-web-tha...) talking about why the author thinks AMD is more flexible (better). Though a biased article(though I think the CJS approach to defining an AMD method is reasonable), it does show the syntax of the two approaches. I CJS syntax has less boilerplate, but is that due to fact that CJS loads synchronously? YES, I know processors like Onejs can make so CJS modules can be used in a browser(wonder is the processed result looks similiar to Requirejs?). Just wondering if Requirejs is designed the way it is because it took loading modules asynchronously into account from the begining.