[dojo-contributors] Dojo 1.7 Goals: has() and granular dependency lists
neonstalwart at gmail.com
Mon Mar 14 12:45:18 EDT 2011
the ticket claims that using has like you've done is better for
compression but can you point to an example or explain why it compresses
better? i haven't been closely following the thread about using closure
with dojo 1.6 - maybe it was somewhere in there?
also, wrt to the top level modules, i like this idea especially if the
top level module does not declare a dependency on the dojo namespace.
that would happen via dojo/_base/foo only. then those top level modules
are extremely portable without any unnecessary dependencies. i would
think that these top level modules should also then be the ones
specified when we become more precise with our dependencies.
On 3/14/2011 12:06 PM, Kris Zyp wrote:
> On 3/11/2011 8:10 AM, Kris Zyp wrote:
>> There are a couple of additional overarching goals that I would like
>> to see pursued in 1.7. First, we should start using the has() pattern
>> for feature detection branching in our code. Here is the ticket for
>> (and explaining) this enhancement:
> Put together a patch for dojo/_base/array.js as an example upgrade to
> Let me know if you have any feedback before I go wild and start
> committing this stuff ;).
> dojo-contributors mailing list
> dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the dojo-contributors