ES3 or ES5?
Locked
 
|
Hello,
I'd like to ask to what platform is amber directed? I thought it is ES3, since it tries to be backward compatible, and that's why ES5 constructs are not used widely. But then I found there are methods which use JSON.stringify. That's ES5 construct (should I know I can use JSON.stringify I would use it in String>>asJavascript as well, it's the most natural (and fast) solution for ES5 platform). So, how it is with amber and ES5, exactly? Herby P.S.: If it's ES5-directed, then all my guards for Object.keys existence should go away as well, shouldn't they? P.P.S.: Alternatively, could it be declared that ES3 is not supported anymore and 0.9.2 will be officially ES5-only (use polyfills like es5-shim yourself if you need to work on old sw)? |
|
|
Hi Herby
I would prefer ES5. Reason 1) The Amber system will become much neater if it can rely e.g. on the new Array functions of ES5. 2) IE9 came out one year ago and supports it; the other current browsers do it as well. Amber is still in 0.9 version numbers; the time it will be ready it will not so much be an issue that only IE9 plus is supported --Hannes On 5/9/12, Herby Vojčík <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hello, > > I'd like to ask to what platform is amber directed? I thought it is ES3, > since it tries to be backward compatible, and that's why ES5 constructs > are not used widely. > > But then I found there are methods which use JSON.stringify. That's ES5 > construct (should I know I can use JSON.stringify I would use it in > String>>asJavascript as well, it's the most natural (and fast) solution > for ES5 platform). > > So, how it is with amber and ES5, exactly? > > Herby > > P.S.: If it's ES5-directed, then all my guards for Object.keys existence > should go away as well, shouldn't they? > > P.P.S.: Alternatively, could it be declared that ES3 is not supported > anymore and 0.9.2 will be officially ES5-only (use polyfills like > es5-shim yourself if you need to work on old sw)? > |
|
|
Hi!
I agree, it's time to move to ES5. If it doesn't bother anyone else. Cheers, Nico 2012/5/9 H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> Hi Herby |
|
|
If there's an impact on IE8/7 support, I suggest to tag/release an Amber version before the move.
Laurent
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 4:28 PM, nicolas petton <[hidden email]> wrote: Hi! |
|
|
Yes, that would be good to have a release with ES3 before moving to
ES5. And the move does not necessarily be immediately IMHO. It depends in which way Amber is used. For example Laurent has it in productive use for a library and there IE7/8 is an issue, I suppose. However as I wrote personally I would prefer ES5 as of now. --Hannes On 5/9/12, laurent laffont <[hidden email]> wrote: > If there's an impact on IE8/7 support, I suggest to tag/release an Amber > version before the move. > > Laurent > > On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 4:28 PM, nicolas petton > <[hidden email]>wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> I agree, it's time to move to ES5. >> If it doesn't bother anyone else. >> >> Cheers, >> Nico >> >> 2012/5/9 H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> >> >> Hi Herby >>> >>> I would prefer ES5. >>> >>> Reason >>> >>> 1) >>> The Amber system will become much neater if it can rely e.g. on the >>> new Array functions of ES5. >>> >>> 2) >>> IE9 came out one year ago and supports it; the other current browsers >>> do it as well. >>> Amber is still in 0.9 version numbers; the time it will be ready it >>> will not so much be an issue that only IE9 plus is supported >>> >>> --Hannes >>> >>> On 5/9/12, Herby Vojčík <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> > Hello, >>> > >>> > I'd like to ask to what platform is amber directed? I thought it is >>> > ES3, >>> > since it tries to be backward compatible, and that's why ES5 constructs >>> > are not used widely. >>> > >>> > But then I found there are methods which use JSON.stringify. That's ES5 >>> > construct (should I know I can use JSON.stringify I would use it in >>> > String>>asJavascript as well, it's the most natural (and fast) solution >>> > for ES5 platform). >>> > >>> > So, how it is with amber and ES5, exactly? >>> > >>> > Herby >>> > >>> > P.S.: If it's ES5-directed, then all my guards for Object.keys >>> > existence >>> > should go away as well, shouldn't they? >>> > >>> > P.P.S.: Alternatively, could it be declared that ES3 is not supported >>> > anymore and 0.9.2 will be officially ES5-only (use polyfills like >>> > es5-shim yourself if you need to work on old sw)? >>> > >>> >> >> > |
|
|
H. Hirzel wrote: > Yes, that would be good to have a release with ES3 before moving to > ES5. And the move does not necessarily be immediately IMHO. It depends > in which way Amber is used. For example Laurent has it in productive > use for a library and there IE7/8 is an issue, I suppose. However as I Me, too, but two points: - it is not fully ES3 complaint (there are few uses of JSON.stringify and that is only what I spotted) - is it too much to ask for (or include) a shim for that library? Herby > wrote personally I would prefer ES5 as of now. > > --Hannes > > On 5/9/12, laurent laffont<[hidden email]> wrote: >> If there's an impact on IE8/7 support, I suggest to tag/release an Amber >> version before the move. >> >> Laurent >> >> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 4:28 PM, nicolas petton >> <[hidden email]>wrote: >> >>> Hi! >>> >>> I agree, it's time to move to ES5. >>> If it doesn't bother anyone else. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Nico >>> >>> 2012/5/9 H. Hirzel<[hidden email]> >>> >>> Hi Herby >>>> I would prefer ES5. >>>> >>>> Reason >>>> >>>> 1) >>>> The Amber system will become much neater if it can rely e.g. on the >>>> new Array functions of ES5. >>>> >>>> 2) >>>> IE9 came out one year ago and supports it; the other current browsers >>>> do it as well. >>>> Amber is still in 0.9 version numbers; the time it will be ready it >>>> will not so much be an issue that only IE9 plus is supported >>>> >>>> --Hannes >>>> >>>> On 5/9/12, Herby Vojčík<[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> I'd like to ask to what platform is amber directed? I thought it is >>>>> ES3, >>>>> since it tries to be backward compatible, and that's why ES5 constructs >>>>> are not used widely. >>>>> >>>>> But then I found there are methods which use JSON.stringify. That's ES5 >>>>> construct (should I know I can use JSON.stringify I would use it in >>>>> String>>asJavascript as well, it's the most natural (and fast) solution >>>>> for ES5 platform). >>>>> >>>>> So, how it is with amber and ES5, exactly? >>>>> >>>>> Herby >>>>> >>>>> P.S.: If it's ES5-directed, then all my guards for Object.keys >>>>> existence >>>>> should go away as well, shouldn't they? >>>>> >>>>> P.P.S.: Alternatively, could it be declared that ES3 is not supported >>>>> anymore and 0.9.2 will be officially ES5-only (use polyfills like >>>>> es5-shim yourself if you need to work on old sw)? >>>>> >>> |
|
|
2012/5/9 Herby Vojčík <[hidden email]>
There's the well known JSON library for that. I don't think there's any other issue with ES5. - is it too much to ask for (or include) a shim for that library? Nope, I think it's a good move. Include JSON.js and some polyfills should be ok. But it will require testing, I want to move Amber to 1.0 eventually :) Cheers, Nico
|
|
|
Hello,
I found this compatibility table on ES5 between different browsers. IE7/8 is almost compatible with... nothing new ! The others issues that are not compatible in some "current" others browsers:
a+ |
«
Return to Amber Smalltalk
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |