W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2014

Re: =[xhr]

From: David Rajchenbach-Teller <dteller@mozilla.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 14:41:54 +0200
Message-ID: <54085E12.3020000@mozilla.com>
To: "James M. Greene" <james.m.greene@gmail.com>, Robert Hanson <hansonr@stolaf.edu>
CC: olli@pettay.fi, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, "Greeves, Nick" <ngreeves@liverpool.ac.uk>
On 04/09/14 14:31, James M. Greene wrote:
>> 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.

I believe it's simply because ES6 Modules are not fully implemented in
browsers yet. But yes, with the timescale discussed, I agree that ES6
Modules are certainly the best long-term choice for this specific use case.


David Rajchenbach-Teller, PhD
 Performance Team, Mozilla

Received on Thursday, 4 September 2014 12:42:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:14:26 UTC