Changes between Version 1 and Version 2 of Ticket #13449, comment 4


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Feb 4, 2016, 12:42:07 AM (6 years ago)
Author:
maratbn
Comment:

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Ticket #13449, comment 4

    v1 v2  
    11> You should just create a shim that exposes jQuery via AMD.
    22
    3 Earlier I forgot to explain that 'shim' is an AMD term, and this bug is not strictly about using jQuery from inside AMD, which is what a shim might be used for.
     3Earlier I forgot to explain that 'shim' is a RequireJS/AMD term, and this bug is not strictly about using jQuery from inside AMD, which is what a shim might be used for.
    44
    55In the scope of this bug, we don't even want to use AMD, we just don't want to have a conflict with some other 3rd party module on the page that happens to be using AMD.
    66
    7 And even if we were using AMD, then conversely, we would not want our AMD-using module to break some other module on the page that happens to be loading jQuery and jQueryUI directly via <script> tags, regardless of whether we used shims or not.
     7And even if we were using AMD, then conversely, we would not want our AMD-using module to break some other module on the page that happens to be loading jQuery and jQueryUI directly via <script> tags, regardless of whether we used RequireJS shims or not.
    88
    99This ticket has been closed prematurely, as a result of a fundamental lack of analysis and understanding as to what it is really about.