You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
All other JS engines provided by jsvu support running scripts by simply passing a file name with no flags:
v8 file.js
chakra file.js
spidermonkey file.js
jsc file.js
However, xs needs the -s flag:
xs -s file.js
...because "without -e, -m or -s, strings are paths to test262 cases or directories".
Since the common case for external users seems to be running scripts, and not tests, can this be reconsidered? Specifically, I'd suggest the following changes:
xs file.js defaults to an implicit -s, and runs file.js as a script
xs file.mjs defaults to an implicit -m, and runs file.mjs as a module (matching V8, JSC, and Node.js)
a new flag is added to cover the Test262 cases/directories use case
WDYT?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
All other JS engines provided by
jsvu
support running scripts by simply passing a file name with no flags:However,
xs
needs the-s
flag:...because "without
-e
,-m
or-s
, strings are paths to test262 cases or directories".Since the common case for external users seems to be running scripts, and not tests, can this be reconsidered? Specifically, I'd suggest the following changes:
xs file.js
defaults to an implicit-s
, and runsfile.js
as a scriptxs file.mjs
defaults to an implicit-m
, and runsfile.mjs
as a module (matching V8, JSC, and Node.js)WDYT?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: