Deno support

[guybedford]

This is a tracking issue for Deno support, which is currently blocked by this jspm core issue - jspm/jspm-core#4 to implement the Node.js builtins.

Node.js builtin support requires versions of all of the Node.js builtins built on top of Deno primitives. Deno have been making some progress on this in https://github.com/denoland/deno/tree/master/std/node but the compatibility there has not yet reached a sufficient point for the jspm core support to be worthwhile to add.

As soon as the Deno node.js library support above reaches a good coverage level, this work can be unblocked further in a first-class support mechanism.

[jsejcksn]

and types headers. (Ref #55)

[brillout]

In the long term, would it then be possible to use like 99.99% of Node.js libraries published on npm with Deno instead of Node.js, by simply doing something like import * from "https://deno-npm.jspm.io/npm-module"?

Beyond v8 APIs, I'm not sure what other APIs could not (practically) be shimmed.

[guybedford]

Yes exactly, and there is currently quite advanced experimental Deno support in the jspm 3 CLI beta to allow using Deno stdlibs for npm libraries. If anyone would like to enroll in the beta, just request access in the Discord (https://discord.com/invite/dNRweUu), it would be great to get feedback on this support coming up to launch.

[guybedford]

Full Deno support has been live for a while per https://jspm.org/docs/workflows#deno-import-maps.

[jsejcksn]

@guybedford Import maps work from an end user standpoint (the dev running the entrypoint in deno), but it's not a solution for anyone who wants to use dependencies from jspm in deno modules published with intent to be consumed by others (e.g. deno.land/x). Doing so would require the downstream user to implement an import map themselves in order for the upstream specifiers to be resolved. They'd need to merge in the library author's import map, and if there are duplicate, conflicting specifier names, then resolution is not possible without one of the developers compromising. I think "full support" would be more inclusive than requiring import maps. Has this already been discussed?