[ideas] a proper suffix for buckle generated js files

[bobzhang]

It could be

"x.re" => "x.re.js"
"x.ml" => "x.ml.js"
or all to "x.bs.js" (trivial to implement)

The benefit is that it is easy to tell whether such js file is coming from bsc, and easy to manage in version control, and easy to remove staled output files.

Other thoughts:

1. How to deal with forthcoming ".mjs"
2. Shall we apply such rules to all output or just in-source output

[chenglou]

It'll be in the bsconfig and at the project level right? Does it propagate to third-party? I'd imagine not since that'd break their requires? As an aside, I'm kinda surprised that in-source build didn't already break third-party js sources' require...

No need to deal with mjs for now. It's still a churn point in the js community.

The ability to more correctly remove stale artifacts is a huge one.

[bobzhang]

I think we will go with ".bs.js", the reason is that having ".re.js" would be more confusing, since when using node module resolution require("xx.re") would try to parse "xx.re" if it does exist.

It'll be in the bsconfig and at the project level right

I think so, the library owner decided which suffix to use (like namespace)

[bobzhang]

relevant links #1436

[chenglou]

But how would require('foo.bs') be different in terms of lookup?

[anmonteiro]

@chenglou won't foo.re potentially cause infinite loops or errors in e.g. webpack loaders, where a request for foo.re.js (require('foo.re');) may be misinterpreted as a request for the Reason file?

[chenglou]

Yes. But there's no more need for bs-loader after this change.

[anmonteiro]

How would you run everything through a single tool then, the way bs-loader allows?

[chenglou]

By making bs-loader do only the compiling part.

[bobzhang]

if foo.re does exist, require('foo.re') (at least for node) will cause node to parse foo.re. foo.re has higher precedence than foo.re.js.
It is not an issue for foo.bs.js since foo.bs does not exist

[chenglou]

Aaaah. Though right now if you switch from foo.ml to foo.re the artifacts might get weird? Compiling to foo.re.js and foo.ml.js would have avoided that. Maybe, just speculating.

But good point. bs it is (or some better named English extension lol)

[chenglou]

Let's just stick with foo.bs.js.