Re: =[xhr]

> The sole reason for these sync
XHRs, if you recall the OP, is to pull in libraries that are only
> referenced deep in a call stack, so as to avoid having to include
> *all* the libraries in the initial download.

If that is true, wouldn't it better for him to switch over to ES6 Module
imports and an appropriate transpiler, for now?

I'm a bit confused as to why it doesn't appear this idea was ever mentioned.

Sincerely,
    James Greene
    Sent from my [smart?]phone
On Sep 4, 2014 7:19 AM, "Robert Hanson" <hansonr@stolaf.edu> wrote:

> SO glad to hear that. I expect to have a fully asynchronous version of
> JSmol available for testing soon. It will require some retooling of
> sophisticated sites, but nothing that a typical JavaScript developer of
> pages utilizing JSmol cannot handle.
>
> I still have issues with the language in the w3c spec, but I am much
> relieved.
>
> Bob Hanson
>
>
> ​
>