Hi,
Is there a plan to migrate to ES Modules in the future or do you consider it worthless? It would be great to be able to import individual methods using ES imports, allowing tree-shaking and many other build optimization.
I'm sorry if this question has already been asked, but I searched in issue and could not find anything about it. Thanks for all the work behind underscore!
mjeanroy
All 15 comments
Feel it is not there yet
Kelichao
on 6 Mar 2018
I was able to add module exports { _ } to the end of my underscore.js file, to at least resolve the error message for importing as import _ from 'underscore.js'
unquietwiki
on 24 Mar 2018
would be awesome :+1:
nebulousdog
on 30 Mar 2018
Is there any good way we can add module exports to the main file, while maintaining backwards compatibility with non-module-supporting versions of JavaScript?
jashkenas
on 23 Apr 2018
However Babel does it?
On Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 1:02 PM Jeremy Ashkenas notifications@github.com
wrote:
Is there any good way we can add module exports to the main file, while
maintaining backwards compatibility with non-module-supporting versions of
JavaScript?—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/jashkenas/underscore/issues/2718#issuecomment-383704124,
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA9fvx9tIUVYAxL0PqcGIoDwhLe25ulOks5trjNlgaJpZM4RPowg
.
unquietwiki
on 23 Apr 2018
maybe core-js is a good example, although probably too modular to directly follow https://github.com/zloirock/core-js
nebulousdog
on 23 Apr 2018
@jashkenas Thanks for your response.
I don't think that it is possible to add the import statements on top of the main file and maintaining backwards compatibility without any transpilation task.
The easiest solution, for me, would be to have a build task to translate import statements to UMD using babel and publish two versions of underscore: the first one with export and a second one for umd.
mjeanroy
on 24 Apr 2018
@jashkenas what do you think of @mjeanroy's suggestion? i would be happy to help...
lohfu
on 17 Jan 2020
@jashkenas what do you think of @mjeanroy's suggestion? i would be happy to help...
Sure! I'd be happy to merge a PR that swaps to named exports for all of the Underscore functions, and also uses Rollup to publish a UMD version of the file.
jashkenas
on 17 Jan 2020
@jashkenas very cool! do you want to keep the src in one single file or can functions be placed in individual files?
lohfu
on 17 Jan 2020
One single file, please.
If we can keep the diff as small and the result as clean as possible, that would help greatly. Ideally, just adding named exports to the functions where they are — with Underscore itself as the default export.
jashkenas
on 17 Jan 2020
@lohfu @mjeanroy has either of you worked on this in the meanwhile? Otherwise I'm offering to adopt this.
jgonggrijp
on 22 Feb 2020
@jgonggrijp unfortunately i have found no time to focus on this, so you are more than welcome to give it a go. if i find time in the near future to help out i will ping you and see how it is going. good luck, have fun!
lohfu
on 22 Feb 2020
Duplicate of #
gogo765795
on 26 Mar 2020
Closed in #2826.
jgonggrijp
on 7 Apr 2020
Related issues
xiaoliwang
·
3Comments
ksullivan
·
9Comments
umarfarooq125
·
8Comments
zackschuster
·
5Comments
afranioce
·
8Comments
Most helpful comment
One single file, please.
If we can keep the diff as small and the result as clean as possible, that would help greatly. Ideally, just adding named exports to the functions where they are — with Underscore itself as the default export.