Added amd support (2 lines)

[acornejo]

Added support for loading as AMD module using requirejs.

The additional code required is minimal, and lots of people (including myself) use AMD modules.

This would take care of #72 and #70

[nwmcsween]

nack adding project specific code is imo against pagejs style

[acornejo]

I wouldn't classify this PR as project specific (unless you feel the existing line dedicated to load in node.js is also a project specific part of page.js). There are various other people who opened issues because they needed this feature, and its just 1 line of code (that doesn't break anything).

That being said, its obviously up to you (mantainers).

[Rich-Harris]

Came here looking for AMD support and found this issue. Seems the easiest solution given the maintainers' desire not to include it is to maintain an AMD-friendly fork, so that's what I've done.

FWIW I'd agree with @acornejo that this isn't project-specific code - AMD is just as much a standard as Node modules (in fact Node modules violate CommonJS Modules/1.1.1 as far as I can tell, by allowing modules to replace the module.exports object). But I also agree with @acornejo that it's entirely the maintainers' decision - ES6 modules will render these arguments moot soon enough anyway ;)

[acornejo]

@Rich-Harris I was also forced to maintain a fork. Its available here:

https://github.com/acornejo/page.js

It has not only AMD support, but a lot of other patches which have been proposed here but that never made it to master.

These include:

• amd support
• back api support
• works in IE8 and IE9 (if you include the polyfill)
• saves path route in context

I am also working on a completely new project which provides all the functionality I miss from page.js, haven't had time to spend on it recently, but hopefully eventually I can complete it and release it as an alternative.

[Rich-Harris]

@acornejo Ah, nice. Will scrap my fork and use yours.

[nwmcsween]

I am not the only maintainer, others may think differently, also try to
push your patches I will look at some tonight
On 20 Mar 2014 08:04, "Rich Harris" notifications@github.com wrote:

@acornejo https://github.com/acornejo Ah, nice. Will scrap my fork and
use yours.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/79#issuecomment-38177731
.

[Rich-Harris]

Thanks @nwmcsween. My patch would be basically identical to this pull request, so rather than cluttering things up with an identical PR it's probably better that I just add my '+1' here. Appreciate the invitation though.