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

Can't use polyfill since v2.0 #75

Closed
mislav opened this issue Jan 22, 2015 · 18 comments
Closed

Can't use polyfill since v2.0 #75

mislav opened this issue Jan 22, 2015 · 18 comments
Assignees

Comments

@mislav
Copy link

mislav commented Jan 22, 2015

Requiring promise.js doesn't polyfill Promise since version 2.0 as it seems it requires a JavaScript loader now.

Version 1.0 of the polyfill could be used as normal JavaScript:

<script src=promise.js></script>
<script>new Promise</script>

This was broken in v2.0.

@mislav
Copy link
Author

mislav commented Jan 22, 2015

Are we supposed to activate the polyfill manually now?

ES6Promise.polyfill()

This doesn't seem to be documented in the README, nor the CHANGELOG, nor is there any GitHub Relase notes https://github.com/jakearchibald/es6-promise/releases/tag/2.0.0

@alexortiz201
Copy link

Thanks @mislav could not for the heck of me find why Promise was still working in chrome but not IE after updating...

@stefanpenner stefanpenner self-assigned this Feb 3, 2015
@andrewjmead
Copy link

+1

@coryrylan
Copy link

+1 ran into this today.

@MrJH
Copy link

MrJH commented Feb 25, 2015

var Promise = Promise || ES6Promise.Promise; << this will help

@stefanpenner
Copy link
Owner

Requiring promise.js doesn't polyfill Promise since version 2.0 as it seems it requires a JavaScript loader now.

So it doesn't require a loader, but it will use one when available. Would you prefer it always expose a global?

@stefanpenner
Copy link
Owner

this is an old version, the latest auto-polyfils https://github.com/jakearchibald/es6-promise/blob/master/lib/es6-promise.umd.js#L18

@stefanpenner
Copy link
Owner

@jakearchibald can we got another release, this is fixed on master.

@mislav
Copy link
Author

mislav commented Feb 25, 2015

If the library is supposed to auto-polyfill, then we'd like to have another 2.x release where this is fixed. If the decision was made to not auto-polyfill, then I'd like to see documentation on how to activate the polyfill ourselves. Then this issue can be closed. Thanks!

@bvaughn
Copy link

bvaughn commented Mar 6, 2015

+1 for docs about the library not auto-polyfilling. Confused me for a few moments also.

jsandoe pushed a commit to concord-consortium/codap that referenced this issue Mar 26, 2015
We were using require, but it wasn't doing what it would be expected to do.
Now we are using the no-require polyfill initialization.
stefanpenner/es6-promise#75
@stefanpenner
Copy link
Owner

If the library is supposed to auto-polyfill, then we'd like to have another 2.x release where this is fixed. If the decision was made to not auto-polyfill, then I'd like to see documentation on how to activate the polyfill ourselves. Then this issue can be closed. Thanks!

we auto-polyfil. @jakearchibald can we get a release this weekend?

@haoxins
Copy link

haoxins commented Apr 15, 2015

is new auto-polyfil release ready?

@stefanpenner
Copy link
Owner

yup, pending a release. I don't think i have all the creds needed to releasing.

@jakearchibald
Copy link
Collaborator

Will do a release today, cheers!

@jakearchibald
Copy link
Collaborator

Done

@mislav
Copy link
Author

mislav commented Apr 15, 2015

README still instructs that we need to do require('es6-promise').polyfill()

@mislav
Copy link
Author

mislav commented Apr 15, 2015

Also, I'm trying to evaluate whether we want to upgrade v1.0.0 to v2.1.0 on github.com. Since CHANGELOG has been eviscerated b301f17, could we maybe ask that release notes be added to Releases for this project? Like, which exact bugs have been fixed, in which cases is the new version more performant, etc. Thanks.

@stefanpenner
Copy link
Owner

Sure. I'll try to find more time.

The quick answer is lots of bug fixes and performance work.

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

No branches or pull requests

9 participants