Using Template literals (Template strings)

[stevenjoezhang]

PR Checklist

Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:

• The commit message follows our guidelines.
• Tests for the changes was maked (for bug fixes / features).
  • Muse | Mist have been tested.
  • Pisces | Gemini have been tested.
• Docs in NexT website have been added / updated (for new features).

PR Type

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

• Bugfix.
• Feature.
• Code style update (formatting, local variables).
• Refactoring (no functional changes, no api changes).
• Build related changes.
• CI related changes.
• Documentation content changes.
• Other... Please describe:

What is the current behavior?

Issue Number(s): N/A

What is the new behavior?

Description about this pull, in several words...

• Screens with this changes: N/A
• Link to demo site with this changes: N/A

How to use?

In NexT _config.yml:

...

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

• Yes.
• No.

[ivan-nginx]

Hmm... good. Template literals easiest way to use than interpolaric expressions.

[ivan-nginx]

Maybe we push this changes only in v7.x? Because ES2015 needed to compatability with template literals, as I see from docs.

---

But it seems nodejs v6.x supported template literals: https://node.green/#ES2015-syntax-template-literals.

---

And NexT v6.x still partially support IE, but Template Literals not supported by IE: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Template_literals#Browser_compatibility

---

I think need to push it to v7.x from tomorrow. What you think? And separated bugfix can be pushed to v6.x also.

P.S. That's why need to split pull request via stash / pop git features. It's better to do 2 pulls / 2 pushes / 2 branches, than 1 big mixed pull.

[ivan-nginx]

Can you to separate bugfix from this pull and make additional pull with bugfix only for push it in v6.x and v7.x in future?

[stevenjoezhang]

Sure, I'll make another pull request

[ivan-nginx]

When will v7 branch.

[stevenjoezhang]

What to do now?

[ivan-nginx]

Now need to create a plan for:

1. Master branch – all changes.
2. v6.x branch – only fixes / optimizations.
3. v7.x branch – fixes / optiomizations / features.

Need to create new issue with suggests on it.

[ivan-nginx]

If all done here, «Squash and merge».

[stevenjoezhang]

Done

[maple3142]

@stevenjoezhang Is there any reason to use template literals in client side script without babel?
Wouldn't it break old browser without es6?

[ivan-nginx]

@maple3142 it seems IE only not support literals: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Template_literals#Browser_compatibility

[stevenjoezhang]

@maple3142 I don't think it's a problem. ES6 was released about 4 years ago, it's supported by most browsers.

The only exception is IE, and bloggers can use v6.x if really want to support it.
For older browsers like IE8 or safari on iOS4, this update won't break them, because they have already been broken by HTML5 and CSS3.
What's your opinion? Is babel or some other solutions needed?

[maple3142]

The problem is uglify-js only support es5, which will cause my blog unable to minify javascripts in the future.
So I think use es6 without babel in production is too early.
Introducing babel to NexT might be another backward compatible choice.

[ivan-nginx]

uglify-js used in hexo-filter-optimize?

[stevenjoezhang]

Hope this would help: mishoo/UglifyJS#3285

http://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es6/

[maple3142]

@ivan-nginx I don't use it, because I use my own build script instead.

@stevenjoezhang I know that es6-aware minifiers does exist, but why do NexT need to use template literals?
In my opinion, I think that both using pure es5 and es6+babel is good.

[ivan-nginx]

So, mb cleant-side scripts don't need literals?

[ivan-nginx]

@maple3142 reverted via #590.

[stevenjoezhang]

Revert reverted via #1023.