Update packages and secure browser compatibility #181
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
@tbennun raised an important point in spcl/dace-vscode#268 about compatibility in our ECMA target. I double checked, and it turns out we claim that we need
ESNextfor this module. That is not true. With adapting a single set difference, we are happy withES2022, which is supported by all modern browsers and covers 97.3% of global users, according to https://caniuse.com . The set difference would requireES2023, which still would be OK in my eyes, but since there is no harm in that single change, I vote for setting our level of support toES2022for the time being.