Skip to content
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

Module bundler #495

Closed
juancabrera opened this issue Jan 14, 2015 · 11 comments
Closed

Module bundler #495

juancabrera opened this issue Jan 14, 2015 · 11 comments
Labels
outdated A closed issue/PR that is archived due to age. Recommended to make a new issue

Comments

@juancabrera
Copy link

One of the best features of Traceur that I'm missing here is the option for inline modules. As they describe it:

modules='inline': All dependencies of the root modules and/or scripts are compiled into a long script that creates modules upon execution then runs the dependents.

Doing this we don't have to use an AMD loader or Browserify to load the modules, which I think is a great option/feature.

@sebmck
Copy link
Contributor

sebmck commented Jan 14, 2015

This is something that es6-module-transpiler did with a "bundle" formatter. @eventualbuddha has been working on abstracting it out and I've been considering implementing it in the core.

@juancabrera
Copy link
Author

I think this should be definitely in the core, I'd be happy to help!

@sebmck sebmck changed the title add inline option to modules Module bundler Jan 21, 2015
@sebmck
Copy link
Contributor

sebmck commented Feb 1, 2015

Ping @eventualbuddha. How's your progress on extracting out the module bundler and would it be trivial to integrate?

@developit
Copy link
Member

I hate to leave +1 comments, but this would eliminate my only current problem working with Babel.

@sebmck
Copy link
Contributor

sebmck commented Feb 20, 2015

@developit It's a non-trivial request and it's not something I'm willing to maintain or plugin if it's going to be extremely hard which it likely is. Is there a reason you just can't use browserify or webpack?

@developit
Copy link
Member

No, those are the avenues I'm exploring now. My build process seems to be inverted, though. It's possible the solution here is just to switch from Gulp to Browserify.

@sebmck
Copy link
Contributor

sebmck commented Feb 20, 2015

You wouldn't be able to use npm modules with the proposed module bundler anyway.

@developit
Copy link
Member

In my case I'm bundling because the result is a standalone library. I think a plugin would be ideal - I have been trying to bandaid a solution together by having Babel output AMD modules, which then get inlined and concatenated via amdclean/concat. If I come up with a solution, I'll probably wrap it up into a blog post or a boilerplate repo of some kind to help out any others looking to build standalone libraries via Babel.

@sebmck
Copy link
Contributor

sebmck commented Feb 20, 2015

Great, that'd be awesome! I'm still interested in the feasibility of including a built-in module bundler but so far it's not looking too good.

@sebmck
Copy link
Contributor

sebmck commented Feb 25, 2015

Closing this as it's currently out of scope and is unnecessary baggage.

@sebmck sebmck closed this as completed Feb 25, 2015
@Rich-Harris
Copy link
Contributor

@developit (and anyone else who needs this feature) - @eventualbuddha and I have been working on an ES6 module bundler called esperanto which does exactly what you need (and generates more compact output than browserify/requirejs+amdclean). My own workflow is ES6 -> babel (blacklist es6.modules option) -> esperanto. It's used by Ember among others.

@lock lock bot added the outdated A closed issue/PR that is archived due to age. Recommended to make a new issue label Jul 29, 2018
@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 29, 2018
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
outdated A closed issue/PR that is archived due to age. Recommended to make a new issue
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants