Replace Babel with Node 4 compatible JavaScript #1835
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
- This also renames the src directory to lib.
- Bookshelf can't be used in browsers anyway, so this dependency is most likely unnecessary.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Introduction
This removes
babeland uses JavaScript compatible with Node version 4 and newer.Motivation
The related issue #1606 provides more info, but it all boils down to increased maintainability.
Proposed solution
All Babel related code is removed and only JavaScript compatible with Node 4 is used.
Even though this version of Node supports the
classsyntax, some classes had to be converted to plain functions because they were producing strange errors that were hard to debug, probably related with #756.Where possible some optimizations were implemented, and the usage of lodash is also reduced in favor of native alternatives that perform better.
Also includes the changes proposed in #1633.
Closes #1633, fixes #1717, fixes #1606.
Current PR Issues
This wasn't extensively tested outside of making sure the test suite runs correctly, but the code coverage is pretty good, so there shouldn't be any major issues with the conversion.