Skip to content

Addition to ESM module spec explanation. #7

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

vladamx
Copy link

@vladamx vladamx commented Jun 19, 2018

Please check if you find this addition valuable.

vladamx added 2 commits June 19, 2018 22:55
I thought that this small addition could bring even more value for this already awesome and unique piece of knowledge.
@bevacqua
Copy link
Member

Reads a bit too hurried to my taste, could you elaborate on it maybe?

@vladamx
Copy link
Author

vladamx commented Jun 20, 2018

Hm, maybe. I can reference this article about the current state of module implementation in node.js. It emphasizes async module loader as an implementation detail. The rest of sentence is pretty clear, I think. Again, it's your call. Best! Vladimir.

@bevacqua
Copy link
Member

bevacqua commented Jun 22, 2018

How about

Another advantage of ESM over CJS `require()` is that ESM specifies a way of doing asynchronous module loading, which implies that parts of an application's dependency graph could be loaded in response to specific events, concurrently, or lazily as needed. Although this feature is not yet implemented in most environments at the time of this writing, there is a strong indicationfootnoteref:[esm-node,You can dive into the specifics through this article from a member of the Node.js team, Myles Borins: https://mjavascript.com/out/esm-node.] that Node.js would incorporate it in the future.

@bevacqua bevacqua closed this in 7195c84 Jun 22, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants