| • History of ES modules
|
| • Dojo and its early module system
|
| • ServerJS community and Narwhal's synchronous module pattern
|
| • CommonJS spec and its influence on NodeJS module system
|
| • AMD spec and its attempt to address limitations of NodeJS module system
|
| • Browserify and bundling of modules in web applications
|
| • Asynchronous loading vs bundling for web applications
|
| • The CommonJS community and ServerJS had issues defining a standard for promises, resulting in multiple specs
|
| • ES modules were influenced by Python's module system, which included features like import * from module, causing issues with scope and namespace collisions
|
| • The spec was revised to use new syntax and address the issues of the previous version, but it remained in a "weird state" before the implementation of new processes at TC39
|
| • ES modules were finalized before many implementations existed, leading to concerns about compatibility with Node.js
|
| • John-David Dalton got involved in addressing edge cases and gotchas in implementing ES modules in Node.js, particularly related to the .mjs extension and transpilation issues
|
| • Discussion of ESM (ECMAScript Modules) parse detection and the introduction of new file extensions
|
| • Proposal for "Unambiguous JavaScript Grammar" to determine ESM files by import or export statements
|
| • Concerns about unintentionally changing parse goals when refactoring code with implicit strict mode
|
| • Overview of current status of ESM implementations in browsers (Edge, Firefox, Chrome, Safari)
|
| • Mention of the loader spec and its relationship to SystemJS
|
| • Discussion of AMD (Asynchronous Module Definition) vs CommonJS and their role in compiling modules for web use
|
| • The debate over AMD vs CommonJS module systems
|
| • The idea of compiling down to a single format, such as AMD, for cross-browser compatibility
|
| • The rise of Babel and its impact on the need for module system arguments
|
| • Criticisms of Node.js requiring JavaScript use for web development
|
| • Disagreements over whether Node.js improved or hindered toolchain innovation
|
| • Node module system limitations for web use
|
| • Browserify and AMD loading without build pipelines
|
| • Standardization of tools and features in technology
|
| • Synchronous vs asynchronous builds and their impact on performance
|
| • Future developments in dynamic imports and bundle size reduction
|
| • Service workers and background code updates as potential solutions
|
| • Discussion of web page loading issues and the impact of JavaScript parsing time
|
| • Criticism of current build system contributing to the problem
|
| • Introduction of project of the week: Lodash 5 ES6+ only loader for Node 4+
|
| • Explanation of how the loader works, including caching and transpiling
|
| • Benefits of using the loader, such as removing compile steps and supporting multiple Node versions
|
| • Details on configuring the loader with options like unambiguous module grammar and commonjs carryover
|
| • Discussion of future plans and the possibility of using the loader in browsers without tooling
|
| • Using gzipped modules for Node.js projects
|
| • ESM (ECMAScript Module) loader with built-in gzip support
|
| • Benefits of using the ESM loader, including smaller package size and faster loading times
|
| • Potential drawbacks of using gzipped files, such as increased CPU usage for decompression
|
| • Lodash 5's new architecture, which will not have an index file or main monolithic include, and will instead use cherry-picked modules
|
| • Node.js caching behavior and its impact on startup costs
|
| • Lodash 5 is changing its approach from providing all functionality upfront to giving minimal functionality and allowing users to opt-in to more features
|
| • Rollup and Webpack will need to be updated to work with the new module system used by Lodash 5
|
| • The Fantasy Land specification is being discussed as a potential standard for interoperability of algebraic structures in JavaScript
|
| • John-David Dalton's pick: contributing to open-source projects like Babel, MomentJS, and Mocha
|
| • Mapzen JavaScript API is being recommended as an alternative to Mapbox for integrating maps with websites or apps
|
| • Goodbye statement from John-David Dalton |
