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

Extension of the API #1012

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Dec 15, 2021
Merged

Extension of the API #1012

merged 11 commits into from
Dec 15, 2021

Conversation

zloirock
Copy link
Owner

@zloirock zloirock commented Nov 22, 2021

(sure, without breaking changes)

  1. Adds a new core-js/actual/** namespace.

We will have 4 main namespaces:

  • /es/ that contains only stable ECMAScript features
  • /stable/ that contains stable ECMAScript features and features from web standards
  • /actual/ that contains stable ECMAScript features, stage-3 ECMAScript proposals and features from web standards that will be the recommended way of core-js usage
  • /features/ that contains only stable ECMAScript features

In core-js@4:

  • import 'core-js' will not contain early stage proposals and will be an equal of import 'core-js/actual'
  • /features/ will be renamed to something more descriptive

  1. Adds entry points for each finished post-ES6 proposal. For example, you will be import 'core-js/proposals/string-padding' for import old string padding proposal.

In core-js@4:

  • core-js/stage/4 entry point will be removed since it contains proposals finished only after the latest core-js major release. For usage of them will be required to import it from /es|stable|actual|features/ namespaces or by a proposal name, like in the example above.

  1. Mentions of /web/ namespace and /virtual/index entries removed from the README.md since they will be removed from core-js@4 (the first is almost useless and confuses users, the second is harmful since they load many unused features and cause problems with the exports package.json field).

I'm not completely sure in the /actual/ name, does anyone have better ideas?

@zloirock
Copy link
Owner Author

Published.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant