Officially drop IE9-10 support, pull out our hacks

[dead-claudia]

Description

• I also fixed a bunch of related comments
• I had to polyfill requestAnimationFrame for Node
• Drive-by: run eslint . --fix
• Drive-by: update transpiling info in CONTRIBUTING.md
• Drive-by: we aren't the only ones going semicolon-free

Motivation and Context

Spurred by some recent Gitter discussion: https://gitter.im/mithriljs/mithril.js?at=5beb8483fee6703aaf68b18b

How Has This Been Tested?

N/A: the only functional code change wasn't specifically tested for anyways.

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• Documentation change

Checklist:

• My code follows the code style of this project.
• My change requires a change to the documentation.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I have read the CONTRIBUTING document.
• I have added tests to cover my changes.
• All new and existing tests passed.
• I have updated docs/change-log.md

[ghost]

I'm using mithril in a project that is used in IE9, does this mean that it will still work if I use some core-js polyfills or something?

Right now I'm using bluebird to polyfill Promises, and I believe I can polyfill rAF. Is there anything else to consider? (at least I don't have to care about load times. Performance doesn't matter for our IE clientele, they just need it to load at some point)

I can't kill it, unfortunately.

[dead-claudia]

@ProtonScott Are you running this on Windows Server or Windows Embedded? If so, I'll consider looking into supporting IE9 (as it's still supported by Microsoft), but since Microsoft does not support IE9/10 for desktop, support for there is pretty much out of the equation.

Also, keep in mind v1 still supports it. v2 is what would break that support.

[dead-claudia]

And @ProtonScott You could continue to use it with polyfills, just you may run into bugs with IE9's lack of support for strict mode.

[dead-claudia]

@ProtonScott If you in fact are running this on Windows Server 2008 (IE 9), please file a new issue, and we'll take a look at it.

[ghost]

@ProtonScott Are you running this on Windows Server or Windows Embedded? If so, I'll consider looking into supporting IE9 (as it's still supported by Microsoft), but since Microsoft does not support IE9/10 for desktop, support for there is pretty much out of the equation.

Also, keep in mind v1 still supports it. v2 is what would break that support.

@isiahmeadows I know you closed this no bigs, but I just wanted to clarify:

I am not using it on Windows Server or Embedded. Its a legacy app that has to work with some state goverment agencies: there are a few (sub 2% of clients, but the state mandates that we have 100% support for all) that are on IE8 or 9. 95% of it is IE11 and a few percentage poitns is IE10, but we still ahve to support those until I believe late next year or Jan 1 2020, not that it matters.

I'm not worried. I'll just polyfill the best I can. If there is a persistent issue i'll just file tickets and such, its all suppose to get upgraded soon enough I believe. Just wanted to get some idea of scope :)

[dead-claudia]

IE10 on desktop is unsupported because IE11 exists on literally all desktop platforms IE10 did.

I will caution you may have IE8 breakage because of ES5 syntax that's not supported in it (notably, getters and setters).

[ghost]

IE10 on desktop is unsupported because IE11 exists on literally all desktop platforms IE10 did.

I will caution you may have IE8 breakage because of ES5 syntax that's not supported in it (notably, getters and setters).

Thank you! Appreciate it. we'll do our best. I'm not worried about it, as much as I just want to prepare when the time comes (I hate splitting code bases where we have support for 1 set of things then another. I'd rather just polyfill, cause I'm a little lazy on that front, but if needed we could move old clients to v1.2 and move to 2.0 on our main) I should check usage logs again too, maybe its fallen again (I could have swore I saw IE10 once in our logs haha, not that it matters, but this is a good impedious for me to check those stats on my end, obviously) I don't expect you guys to have to change this or consider it.

I appreciate the quick responses. 👍