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

Figure out cleaner way to deal with Polyfills #709

Closed
thheller opened this issue May 12, 2020 · 0 comments
Closed

Figure out cleaner way to deal with Polyfills #709

thheller opened this issue May 12, 2020 · 0 comments

Comments

@thheller
Copy link
Owner

Currently there are 3 separate passes that may emit code that requires polyfills.

  • shadow-js which converts npm sources
  • classpath-js which converts ESM on the classpath
  • goog-js which converts goog.module on the classpath

These need to be coordinated so they don't end up injecting polyfills 3 times. shadow-js sources never make it through :advanced so they need to stay separate but it might make sense to combine classpath/goog sources.

Currently polyfills are never added dynamically so requiring a file that requires polyfills will fail if they weren't previously part of the build already.

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

1 participant