es5!

[davidfig]

es5!

[hassanshaikley]

Yay, thanks David. PS I would happily contribute in more ways, if you have any smaller things you want done let me know. I have been meaning to test the pixi-more branch and give you feedback. I hope to get to that soon!

Thanks again for your awesome work!

[davidfig]

Do you know how pixi.js handles es5? I know they use babel when they produce the pixi.min.js package. But not sure how they handle it for npm.

[hassanshaikley]

Looks like they use babel and something called pixify, especially made for PIXI! I will explore it more and see if I can come up with anything.

https://www.npmjs.com/package/pixify

[hassanshaikley]

check this out!

https://github.com/hassanshaikley/pixi-viewport/commit/babd0072a5d6d465594eb2bc3ceb9435a16d8bbd

Let me know what you think. Now I am getting the same error with pixi-ease. I can submit a PR to both of them or create separate forks for myself. It's your call, David! Thank you for your incredible work.

[davidfig]

Does this mean we have to maintain two npm packages (similar to uglify-js / uglify-es)?

pixi.js, is transpiling/babelifying its es6 source code when running pixify. They place the transpiled files into the /lib directory, which is what they export for npm.

I wonder why they don't minify it during packaging and export that one file instead of the /lib directory since they're already using a map file.

It might make sense to come up with a similar solution. It's not like es6 runs faster than es5 (it's just much easier to code in). I'd love to deploy this in pixi-viewport, pixi-ease, and the rest of my npm'd projects, while maintaining the source code readability.

Thoughts?

[hassanshaikley]

What about a hook that transpiles before publishing to NPM? I don't think we would need 2 npm packages, I didn't want to assume that you would think transpiling was desirable. And I am a little shy to make a pull request.

I am not sure why they have it set up as separate files. I really didn't understand that bit. I suppose we could export it to one file if we wanted, but I don't imagine that makes much of a difference?

Do you have any other feedback on this, aside from maybe trying to turn it into one file?

[davidfig]

It looks like pixi.js is following something close to this article: https://github.com/bookercodes/articles/blob/master/how-to-build-and-publish-es6-npm-modules-today-with-babel.md

It's similar to what you did. They transpile all the files and put it into a dist/ directory and then point npm to that directory. I'm happy to take a pull request if you want to try to finish the work.

Will have to do same for pixi-ease since its a dependent.

If you don't have time, I'll try to take a crack at it this week.

[hassanshaikley]

Check it out! : )

#29

Let me know if it is missing anything!

[davidfig]

Nice! The pixi-more branch now supports es5. I'm hoping to push this to master soon after more testing. I also updated pixi-ease, so it should be a full es5 solution.

[davidfig]

@hassanshaikley, since I added es5 support to pixi-viewport, do you mind deprecating pixi-viewport-es5 (npm deprecate pixi-viewport-es5 )?

It caused some confusion when I was providing support when someone thought they were using pixi-viewport but accidentally installed pixi-viewport-es5.

Thanks!

[hassanshaikley]

My bad, David! I will get to this right now. : )

[davidfig]

Awesome. Thanks!