github at esdiscuss.org (2013-07-12T02:27:37.390Z)
On 01/06/2013, at 23:57, Fran?ois REMY wrote:
> Arrow functions probably shouldn't be used for this, this is not very readable.
Yeah, arrow functions are grawlix-y per se, but I've come to admit that Brendan (et al) was (were) right: they're going to be a Good Part™.
> I think you should have a look at modules, this is what is expected to replace this pattern ;-)
I understand node modules perfectly but everything I've seen in es-discuss about the modules proposal was almost incomprehensible (for me). Do you know of a harmony-modules-for-dummies doc or video that I can read/see to learn more? :-)
How would I turn this IIFE into an inlined module?
```js
var myModule= (()=>{
//...
return someThing;
})();
```
Also, in node the modules are read synchronously from a disk drive, how can these new es6 modules deal with modules that have to be read from the network when is JS there's no means for IO?
On 01/06/2013, at 23:57, François REMY wrote: > Arrow functions probably shouldn’t be used for this, this is not very readable. Yeah, arrow functions are grawlix-y per se, but I've come to admit that Brendan (et al) was (were) right: they're going to be a Good Part™. > I think you should have a look at modules, this is what is expected to replace this pattern ;-) I understand node modules perfectly but everything I've seen in es-discuss about the modules proposal was almost incomprehensible (for me). Do you know of a harmony-modules-for-dummies doc or video that I can read/see to learn more? :-) How would I turn this IIFE into an inlined module? var myModule= (()=>{ //... return someThing; })(); Also, in node the modules are read synchronously from a disk drive, how can these new es6 modules deal with modules that have to be read from the network when is JS there's no means for IO? Thank you, -- ( Jorge )();