A proposal for how psc-make might work with require (I mostly rambled this on IRC but not sure if you saw it):

1. We still use the method of a second command line option to accept FFI files
2. We still read these files for a // module X.Y.Z comment
3. During make, copy these js files to output/X.Y.Z/foreign.js
4. Then we just need to include var _ffi = require("./foreign.js"); (or whatever for the var) in the output/X.Y.Z/input.js file.

👍 Looks nice, and I like the FFI suggestion.

I guess we can tidy up the Options structure if we manage to do a similar thing with psc-make too.

So what's the plan for psc-make? I guess if we want to use require for module imports, it seems like we're heading down the path of using psc-make as the main JS backend. That's good, but we would need to figure out a way to do dead code elimination afterwards. I like the idea of adding simple delimiting comments to the Common JS module, and also indicating dependencies. That way, psc-make could generate those comments too, and psc-bundle (or whatever we want to call it) could process those comments and do DCE. The comments might get a bit large though.

Like an idiot I spent half the afternoon using language-javascript to try and extract the module comment out of the source, which worked, but was a ton of code as I made a traversal type thing for the AST, etc. and then as soon as I was done realised that just parsing the lines in the file would be a lot easier. Oh well.

I'm going out for a bit, but will be back later to get this working at last.

How does $foreign sound for the JS name for the require'd/embedded object containing the foreign definitions?

@garyb I fixed up psci and the test suites. All that's left now is hopefully DCE so let's discuss that when you have time. I think we should make a release candidate though, so that we can start updating libraries again, and so that @hdgarrood and @nicodelpiano have a reasonable place to send PRs for GSOC.

Fingers crossed that the CI build works ...

Well, CI is passing apart from the core-tests step, which we expect to break right now.

I'm happy to merge this then, if you are?

Yep!