ECMAScript 6 compatibility table(kangax.github.io)
kangax.github.io
ECMAScript 6 compatibility table
http://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es6/
6 comments
It gets worse when someone tries to use Typescript AND JSX in the same project. A total hell since both languages are incompatible.
Wouldn't it make more sense to go with JSX and Flow?
Internally TS is a two pass compilation. First type check, then transpile to ES5.
The type check step should be available to run on its own. IMO they should not even worry about transpiling, just be a type checking engine.
The API for TS, last I used it, was extremely limited. It has always been viewed as a black box compiler by the authors- they need to expose more flexibility.
The type check step should be available to run on its own. IMO they should not even worry about transpiling, just be a type checking engine.
The API for TS, last I used it, was extremely limited. It has always been viewed as a black box compiler by the authors- they need to expose more flexibility.
I had no idea how far ahead of node on es6 features io.js was - it passes nearly twice as many of the tests as node (23% vs 40%)
This comes from being on a current version of V8... Node.js has always been a little behind, and since 0.10 has become very stagnant. Part of the reason for the shift to io.js
> I had no idea how far ahead of node on es6 features io.js was
That is because io.js upgraded to a current, and maintained, version of Google V8. This was one of the reasons for the fork.
io.js: V8 4.1.x
node.js: V8 3.28.x
That is because io.js upgraded to a current, and maintained, version of Google V8. This was one of the reasons for the fork.
io.js: V8 4.1.x
node.js: V8 3.28.x
"Show unstable platforms" + "Sort by number of features" is quite interesting: IE preview wins among browsers. Firefox is close second, and both are ahead of and V8 and even Google's Traceur transpiler.
Number of features isn't a terribly useful comparison, however, since it assumes all features are equal. It's like taking the arithmetic mean of very different benchmarks as a benchmark score.
Writing tests for 'let' support, for instance, is harder than just testing that all the Array.prototype methods are now on TypedArrays, so those methods are worth twice that of let support, even though let is considerably more complicated to implement and game changing in its consequences.
Writing tests for 'let' support, for instance, is harder than just testing that all the Array.prototype methods are now on TypedArrays, so those methods are worth twice that of let support, even though let is considerably more complicated to implement and game changing in its consequences.
Definitely.
And that's why we give different weight to different features. Smallest ones (Math methods, octal & binary literals, etc.) have a weight of 0.25. Medium ones (Map, Set, rest parameters, etc.) have a weight of 0.5. Finally, landmark features (arrow functions, classes, generators) have a weight of 1.
The final % score is calculated according to all this.
And that's why we give different weight to different features. Smallest ones (Math methods, octal & binary literals, etc.) have a weight of 0.25. Medium ones (Map, Set, rest parameters, etc.) have a weight of 0.5. Finally, landmark features (arrow functions, classes, generators) have a weight of 1.
The final % score is calculated according to all this.
[deleted]
That's an aggravating chart for colorblind users.
Are module loaders missing in the feature list for ES6?
For now, yes.
Modules are difficult to test (via regular means like `eval`) and the standard is still in the flux so we're trying to figure out the best way — https://github.com/kangax/compat-table/issues/316
Modules are difficult to test (via regular means like `eval`) and the standard is still in the flux so we're trying to figure out the best way — https://github.com/kangax/compat-table/issues/316
Maybe it would be a good idea to add a note in the meantime. I was quite confused when the module stuff was gone. I assumed it was moved to ES7, but it didn't show up there either. I finally learned the truth after googling a bit and finding that issue. Would have been nice if the page would have told me that right away.
Is this the only noteworthy ES6 feature which isn't tested?
Is this the only noteworthy ES6 feature which isn't tested?
Pretty much the only feature, yes. We'll be adding it shortly, sorry for the confusion.
And because typescript != javascript, we can't use any other tools, either. TS is duplicating the 6to5 efforts, with little to show for it.
If you use TS, right now you're stuck with es5. It's starting to itch.
I wish they'd prioritize the es6 features in es6 output mode and let me worry about converting that to es5.