I want to use ES6 features in my script, and having all browsers support it. How can I do that, and can I?
I've been thinking about using some tool that will convert my code to ES5 automatically on git pulling it on the server, and create the second file out of it. And then in the browser I could use one of those scripts, depending on the browser and its version.
Is this possible?
It would however create some problems:
Converted code would have the same performance as writing the code
in ES5 natively.
I would have to write some kind of if in the HTML, and I want to
include just one script, without anything else.
What's the best way to do this?
Until more browsers support ES2015 (aka ES6) features, using transpilers and polyfills will be the only way to go. Checkout the ES6 compatibility table to determine what features you can use today for the browsers your site supports.
Keep in mind that there are two main parts to ES6:
new language features
new native API features
Until all the browsers your site supports have support for the new ES6 language features, you won't be able to use them in your scripts without first transpiling them to an ES5 equivalent. I've used babel and it has worked great. The ES5 equivalent code that is generated has performed just fine. It also beats me trying to write equivalent ES5 code manually. The code generated by babel has been thoroughly tested by babel's test suite and has been used by thousands of developers around the world. Also, writing your code with ES6 is shorter and easier to maintain. This saves a lot of developer time. When the day comes that when all the browsers your site supports have support for all the ES6 features, then you can turn off the transpiling step in your build and you'll get the full benefit of native browser performance without having to manually convert your manually written ES5 code to ES6.
Many of the new native API features can be used today by providing a polyfill. The polyfill is only needed when you want to use an ES6 feature AND you need to support older browsers. With a polyfill, only the older browsers may have slower performance compared to the native implementation. Since most of the modern browsers already support many of the native ES6 API features, many of your users will get the full performance of the browser's native implementation. From my experience with polyfills, I have not noticed any significant performance implications.
If you are concerned about modern browsers unnecessarily downloading and running the polyfill all for naught, then there are techniques you can to do minimize the impact:
On the server-side, you can detect the browser making the request and determine whether to bother sending the polyfill script tag in the response.
You can properly version the polyfill and make sure the web server's caching is set so the browser will rarely make a request for the polyfill after the initial download.
babel used to be able to transpile the ES6 code in your html files, but that feature has been removed. You can just move your embedded code to a separate external JavaScript file. If you don't like the idea of incurring another request to get this external JavaScript file, then you can do the following:
Write your ES6 code in a separate file.
Run this file through babel
Use your server-side scripting language to include the transpiled content directly in your HTML.
#DannyHurlburt's answer was correct at the time of posting it, but now, you can use TypeScript language (with .ts file extension) to work around this. TypeScript is a strict superset of JavaScript, so any ES6 code you have is also lexically valid TypeScript. TS compiles to old versions of JavaScript as old as ES3.
Related
I'm a bit confused about the whole "javascript version" in general. How do i know what version is supported by what browser, and how do i know what my framework (in example stenciljs) outputs? How can i check if an existing, minified file is ecma5 or ecma6?
Thanks
It is not about language version, it's about language features which comes from ECMAscript specification.
You can check JS features supported by browsers on caniuse or kangax's table
When it comes about libraries they often write about browser support.
For example, Stencil does,
React does
Also there are tools like Babel which are created for for code transpilation. It means that we can put ES-next code to babel, specify target browsers, for example IE11. And it returns code which is able to run in older environments. But not all features may be transpilated.
I implemented CKEditor on a project and I was surprised to discover, either in the interface or in the source code, that it's written in ECMA 6, using all its modern features such as the short function notation (arrow functions).
Given these features are not widely supported as the ECMA 5 version is (not yet as of today, July 2018), I ask why the developers made this strategic choice: are they not interested in a wide browser compatibility? Or is CKEditor so well spread to allow them to dictate a precise direction towards modern browser versions, risking to lose a portion of users?
Browsers are not a problem
Let's be clear here:
CKEditor 5 can be run in all browsers which it supports without any transpilation. All browsers which it supports have a sufficient level of ES6 support.
Why would you need ES5?
The only reason why you might want to transpile CKEditor 5 from ES6 to ES5 are:
Legacy browsers which it doesn't support (at least at the moment).
Existing setups which use ES6-incompatible JS minifiers (UglifyJS). It may be a bit inconvenient to include CKEditor 5 in such applications but, as it was commented already, we explain how to transpile CKEditor 5 to ES5.
Development environments for frameworks like React (create-react-app) or Angular (angular-cli) which didn't catch up yet and still require that libs kept in your node_modules/ are in ES5.
The last case is indeed a bigger problem because you don't have that much control over this environments as on your own projects. As I commented on Twitter:
3 years ago we decided that CKEditor 5 will be released in ES6 because all browsers which we planned to support should have a sufficient ES6 support by our ETA.
We were right – it worked great... in the browsers.
It turned out that the problem is in the build environments (create-react-app, angular-cli) which did not catch up.
We'll need to introduce ES5 builds just to satisfy these envs ;/
To clarify – I'm not criticising authors of these tools. It's more of an observation that we've been always worried about browser support while today the tools stop us.
And, as I mentioned in the other tweet, the problem is broad (e.g. finding a supported, stable, ES6+ compatible and fast minifier – see e.g. https://github.com/webpack-contrib/uglifyjs-webpack-plugin/issues/262 …).
Fortunately, the situation is improving:
#mtrebizan:
I think CRA 2.0 will be shipping non-transpiled code,just don't know how far release is. cc #dan_abramov
#dan_abramov:
There’s alphas you can try. Other than that the ETA is when the community makes it happen 🙂 there’s active work and you can help too
I know there was work in angular-cli on improving this situation too. So, in a relatively short time, all should work smoothly too.
Time aspect
The difference (in terms of features) between ES6 and ES5 is huge. Back in 2014, when we've been starting CKEditor 5 development, we chose ES5. ES6 wasn't standardised yet.
However, the situation changed in 2015. ES6 got published and our tests proved that all features we looked to (classes, generators, iterators, weak sets, weak maps, and more) were already available in Chrome. We decided to go for it and see.
About 1.5 year later CKEditor 5 worked natively (without any transpilation) in all modern browsers (with the exception of Safari which had a nasty bug). At the same time, babel-minify became usable so we didn't have to transpile CKEditor 5 to ES5 even for production.
It's 2018 and the number of obstacles was reduced even more. There's a chance that still this year you won't have to transpile CKEditor 5 to ES5 unless your project is supposed to be ES5 because of browser support (but then, why would you include CKEditor 5? it's not going to work in those browsers anyway).
Looking at the history of CKEditor 3-4, CKEditor 5 will stay with us for the next 8+ years. So, we're talking here about 2026+. This means that for the vast majority of its lifetime ES6 will not be a problem.
CKEditor supports vanilla javascript (ES5) and ES6 as well. The issue is not the editor, it just supports it, doesn't care about compatibility because it doesn't know where your code is going to run but only how to highlight and give you tools to develop it.
The thing is that, by the time, the ECMA standard is under heavy development, improving in every version, so there's a lot going on, there are a lot of proposals being added every month, some passes and makes their way into the standard, which later gets into cool features we can use like arrow function.
All of that makes it harder for browsers to catch on the new updates. Even so, there are a lot that supports the new features now (you may track the updates in that page).
Anyway, besides from all of that, you may use a code compiler like Babel (which compiles ES6/ES7... down to code the browsers can understand such as ES5). It's widely adopted, and recommended for the thing it does: Make your life easier. Many big companies adopted it, such as Facebook which uses react (and made it) using Babel to compile not only ES6 but JSX (check this).
Side note: Why should I use ES6 if I need a compiler?
https://itnext.io/why-you-should-use-es6-56bd12f7ae09
I would like to know if it's secure to use let and const keywords while working with UI5. I don't know if returning a let, const, or even creating for instance a sap.m.Table with let would have adverse effects.
Maybe someone has some previous experience with this?
The documentation still warns about the possible incompatibility with UI5:
⚠ Restriction
We currently do not guarantee that newer ECMAScript standards, such as ES6/ES2015, work with OpenUI5.
On the other hand, I've been using ES6+ features (including const and let) with UI5 without any issues so far.
Note
In order to support building the application with ES6+ syntax in the application code with ...
UI5 Tooling: upgrade the npm dependency #ui5/cli at least to the latest 2.x.y version. See "ECMAScript Support" in UI5 Tooling for more information.
SAP Web IDE: if your project still depends on the legacy #sap/grunt-sapui5-bestpractice-build, ensure its version is at least 1.3.65 or newer e.g. 1.4.0.
Reporting the code coverage with the legacy blanket.js library version lower than 1.2.0 fails if ES6+ syntax is used for the target project. Even if no ES6+ syntax is used, the UI5 bootstrap config sap-ui-async has to be disabled in order to allow the code coverage report with blanket.js. Subscribe to OpenUI5 issue #3540 to get notified about the latest development regarding the code coverage report feature in UI5 projects.
I would assume that you are afraid of browser incompatibilities? let and const are constructs for declaring variables; they do not affect object lifetimes. let declares a block scope variable whilst const declares a read-only variable. The objects contained in these variables have a completely different life cycle.
This is not really a UI5 issue, but a general JavaScript issue. Regardless of the libraries that you are using, the compatibility of your app will be determined by two factors:
The compatibility matrix of each of the library that you are using.
The compatibility of the code that you are writing.
As you can't really control the compatibility matrix of UI5 (which should cover the compatibility matrix for ES6), it all boils down to two major questions that you have to ask yourself:
What browsers do I support?
Can I use something to transpile my code to support older browsers?
For the first question, if you only care for browsers which can support natively ES6 (not IE), then you can definitely use it. Otherwise, the second question might make more sense. If you have a decent C.I. pipeline in place for your app, then you could use something like babel to transform your shiny ES6 code into the verbose spaghetti that IE loves so much.
Later edit:
As per the comments, I would point out that ES6 is not a supported in an all-or-nothing fashion. Feature sub-sets (like support for const and let) may be available for some browsers (IE) even if ES6 in its entirety is not. Concretely, based on https://caniuse.com/#feat=let and https://caniuse.com/#feat=const, it seems that let and const are available in IE11 (but not in older versions). Other features like ES6 class definitions are not supported.
SAP WebIDE can deploy ES6 let/const syntax as long as you use a newer version of the build module.
Just use: "#sap/grunt-sapui5-bestpractice-build": "1.3.65"
I am writing a Polymer 2 application. The default is to transpile ES6 to ES5 so that you can use ES6 syntax and be sure it will just work.
The problem with this is that everybody (even supporting browsers) get to receive transpiled code.
Two questions:
Is it just too crazy to say "no" to legacy browsers, and just stop transpiling?
Is there an easy-ish way to redirect specific browsers to a non-transpiled version of the app?
It really depends on the audience of the app you want to create. As for my own projects, I can see in my Google Analytics that there are still some people who are accessing it via Safari 8, 9 and even IE 11. I cannot just tell them to use a different browser because of several reasons... mostly financial reason (either personal or corporate)
Because of that, it is still a default for me to just transpile back to ES5 (given that I am using Webpack for now while waiting for the script type="module" to stabilize).
As for easiest way, they say if you use Polymer-CLI's serve function, it autotranspiles your code depending on the browser's capabilities.
Or you can have a simple javascript code that tries to check an ES6 method, then if it works, it loads the ES6 version of the bundled code... if not, it loads the ES5 version of the bundled code + the custom-elements-es5-adapter. But this one takes some performance hit because of the wait to parse the initial JS script to check before loading the necessary files instead of loading them right away (I haven't tested this though)
Or you can check in the server what type of browser is calling and then heuristically guess what type of version code you want to send.
As for performance for the overhead of the transpiled code, it's a bit miniscule, given that if you are just using Polymer.Element, you can get at least 12KB of code... then you'll have like 30+KB left to show content, which is more than enough to have a PRPL+50
The simple answer isL use prpl-server-node which does exactly what I was talking about, and more.
Specifically:
Differential Serving
Modern browsers offer great features that improve performance, but most applications need to support older browsers too. prpl-server can serve different versions of your application to different browsers by detecting browser capabilities using the user-agent header.
Builds
prpl-server understands the notion of a build, a variant of your application optimized for a particular set of browser capabilities.
I am curious to understand/figure-out if the ECMAScript-6 new-changes will work on the old browsers or not.
Why I am asking this question is:
I remember the introduction of 'use strict'; in ECMAScript-5, it was meant for the compatibility with the old versions.
That means the old browsers will keep working fine and they will just ignore it when they encounter the 'use strict'; statement while parsing the new JavaScript code.
And the new JS-engines will treat the statement 'use strict'; in some special way as detailed here Strict mode.
So, coming to the question
I seriously doubt and curious to know how would the ECMAScript-5 compliant browsers behave when they will parse the ECMAScript-6 code.
The reason for my doubt is ECMAScript-6 new features involve syntax change/updates. And the old browsers which are new-syntax-unaware-engines will start throwing errors when they encounter any of the new syntax from the following
yield[*], Map, Set, WeakMap, function* foo(){}, =>, for...of etc.
My concern is has the decision/inclusion of new features in ECMAScript-6 taken care of supporting the old-browsers without any break of code?
If Yes then how?
If Not then what should I do to keep my old-browser-users happy?
I see one solution to keep the users using old browsers happy by including some transpiler like traceur-compiler in my project. This will convert my ECMAScript-6 code to ECMAScript-5 equivalent. But do I have any other solution to keep my old-browser-users happy?
What you are trying to explain here is forward compatibility. Obviously ES 5 ( or more precisely ES 5 engine ) is not forward compatible. Any way its hard to acheive and rare to find.
Although you can see that some of the features of upcoming ES 7 are already out and hence possibly ES 6's engine may be implemented considering those enhancement. So whenever ES 7 comes, some of the features will be working in older engine.
Answer to the question, is ES 6 backward compatible will be "yes". Yes! ES 6's engine will be happy to run ES 5's code but vice versa is not true.
Many ES6 features will not work in an ES5 JS engine, particularly new syntax features such as for/of or arrow functions, generators, etc.... Some features like the Set object can be partially polyfilled for older browsers, others cannot.
Of the list of features you had in your question:
yield[*], Map, Set, WeakMap, function* foo(){}, =>, for...of
None of those are compatible with older versions of Javascript and will either cause syntax or reference errors. Some characteristics of Map and Set can be polyfilled (though not all). Yield, generators, arrow functions and for...of are just new syntax that older browsers do not process and cannot execute. It is possible to use an ES6 transpiler that will convert your code to ES5-compatible code. That isn't really ES6 backwards compatibility, but rather a code conversion that uses only ES5 syntax to accomplish the same things that are expressed in the newer ES6 syntax. Some of that is done with polyfills and some done with alternative ways of expressing an ES6 construct using only ES5 code (and usually more ES5 code).
If your code runs in something like node.js or if it's a plug-in for a specific version of a specific browser, then you have better control over the JS engine and can likely use ES6 features sooner than in a browser.
If your code runs in a browser and you're not using a transpiler to conver to ES5 code, then it will be awhile (many years) until most browsers in use on the internet are all ES6 ready.
The different purpose of "use strict"; (removing support for bad practices) is more consistent with allowing for compatibility with older versions than new language features like generators as the "use strict"; construct was specifically chosen to be something that a new browser could detect, but an older browser would just see as a normal string. New ES6 features that represent new language syntax are simply not that way as older browsers don't know how to process them and even if they could somehow ignore the newer syntax, they don't support the functionality that the new syntax implies.
You may find this article useful which discusses some of the issues in trying to use ES6 today:
ECMAScript 6 Resources For The Curious JavaScripter
If you want to use most of ES6 capabilities today in a wide range of browsers, then your best option is probably to transpile your code using something like BabelJS. This will transpile your ES6 code into ES5 compatible code that will run in any ES5 browser. You get to write in ES6, but the code will run in a wide range of browsers.
Or, if you're running in only a specific environment (such as a browser plug-in for a specific version of that browser) or a specific runtime engine such as node.js, then you can write code that uses the ES6 features that are already supported in that specific engine.