So I created a project using yeoman init and it uses requirejs, I wish to replace requirejs with almondjs to make it load faster. How can I do this?
AlmondJS is here: https://github.com/jrburke/almond
RequireJS is here: http://requirejs.org/
Yeoman: http://yeoman.io/
The only mention of require.js in Gruntfile.js is:
// rjs configuration. You don't necessarily need to specify the typical
// `path` configuration, the rjs task will parse these values from your
// main module, using http://requirejs.org/docs/optimization.html#mainConfigFile
//
// name / out / mainConfig file should be used. You can let it blank if
// you're using usemin-handler to parse rjs config from markup (default
// setup)
rjs: {
// no minification, is done by the min task
optimize: 'none',
baseUrl: './scripts',
wrap: true,
name: 'main'
},
Make sure you are using Yeoman 1.0 and not an earlier version. It uses grunt-requirejs which has almond support. rjs was used in versions before 1.0.
See documentation at https://github.com/asciidisco/grunt-requirejs/blob/master/docs/almondIntegration.md. It appears that all you may need to do is add almond: true to the options for requirejs in your Gruntfile (or not depending on what you want to do--again see the documentation).
Related
Architecture
I would like to share code between client and server side. I have defined aliases in the webpack config:
resolve: {
// Absolute paths: https://github.com/webpack/webpack/issues/109
alias: {
server : absPath('/src/server/'),
app : absPath('/src/app/'),
client : absPath('/src/client/'),
}
},
Problem
Now on the server side I need to include webpack in order to recognize the correct paths when I require a file. For example
require('app/somefile.js')
will fail in pure node.js because can't find the app folder.
What I need (read the What I need updated section)
I need to be able to use the webpack aliases. I was thinking about making a bundle of all the server part without any file from node_modules. In this way when the server starts it will use node_modules from the node_modules folder instead of a minified js file (Why? 1st: it doesn't work. 2nd: is bad, because node_modules are compiled based on platform. So I don't want my win files to go on a unix server).
Output:
Compiled server.js file without any node_modules included.
Let the server.js to use node_modules;
What I need updated
As I've noticed in https://github.com/webpack/webpack/issues/135 making a bundled server.js will mess up with all the io operation file paths.
A better idea would be to leave node.js server files as they are, but replace the require method provided with a custom webpack require which takes in account configurations such as aliases (others?)... Can be done how require.js has done to run on node.js server.
What I've tried
By adding this plugin in webpack
new webpack.optimize.CommonsChunkPlugin(/* chunkName= */"ignore", /* filename= */"server.bundle.js")
Entries:
entry: {
client: "./src/client/index.js",
server: "./src/server/index.js",
ignore: ['the_only_node_module'] // But I need to do that for every node_module
},
It will create a file server.js which only contains my server code. Then creates a server.bundle.js which is not used. But the problem is that webpack includes the webpackJsonp function in the server.bundle.js file. Therefore both the client and server will not work.
It should be a way to just disable node_modules on one entry.
What I've tried # 2
I've managed to exclude the path, but requires doesn't work because are already minified. So the source looks like require(3) instead of require('my-module'). Each require string has been converted to an integer so it doesn't work.
In order to work I also need to patch the require function that webpack exports to add the node.js native require function (this is easy manually, but should be done automatically).
What I've tried # 3
In the webpack configuration:
{target: "node"}
This only adds an exports variable (not sure about what else it does because I've diffed the output).
What I've tried # 4 (almost there)
Using
require.ensure('my_module')
and then replacing all occurrences of r(2).ensure with require. I don't know if the r(2) part is always the same and because of this might not be automated.
Solved
Thanks to ColCh for enlighten me on how to do here.
require = require('enhanced-require')(module, require('../../webpack.config'));
By changing the require method in node.js it will make node.js to pass all requires trough the webpack require function which allow us to use aliases and other gifts! Thanks ColCh!
Related
https://www.bountysource.com/issues/1660629-what-s-the-right-way-to-use-webpack-specific-functionality-in-node-js
https://github.com/webpack/webpack/issues/135
http://webpack.github.io/docs/configuration.html#target
https://github.com/webpack/webpack/issues/458
How to simultaneously create both 'web' and 'node' versions of a bundle with Webpack?
http://nerds.airbnb.com/isomorphic-javascript-future-web-apps/
Thanks
Thanks to ColCh for enlighten me on how to do here.
require = require('enhanced-require')(module, require('../../webpack.config'));
By changing the require method in node.js it will make node.js to pass all requires trough the webpack require function which allow us to use aliases and other gifts! Thanks ColCh!
My solution was:
{
// make sure that webpack will externalize
// modules using Node's module API (CommonJS 2)
output: { ...output, libraryTarget: 'commonjs2' },
// externalize all require() calls to non-relative modules.
// Unless you do something funky, every time you import a module
// from node_modules, it should match the regex below
externals: /^[a-z0-9-]/,
// Optional: use this if you want to be able to require() the
// server bundles from Node.js later
target: 'node'
}
I'm using Gulp and Browserify to package my Javascript into 2 separate bundles: application.js and vendor.js.
How do I bundle the vendor package if my vendor libraries are installed with Bower?
In my gulpfile, I'm using the following modules:
var gulp = require("gulp");
var browserify = require("browserify");
var debowerify = require("debowerify");
var source = require("vinyl-source-stream");
Assuming that I have only the Phaser framework installed with bower (for this example), my Gulp task to create the application package looks like this:
gulp.task("scripts-app", function () {
browserify("./app/javascripts/index.js")
.external("phaser")
.pipe(source("application.js"))
.pipe(gulp.dest("./tmp/assets"));
});
Meanwhile, the vendor task looks like this:
gulp.task("scripts-vendor", function () {
browserify()
.transform(debowerify)
.require("phaser")
.pipe(source("vendor.js"))
.pipe(gulp.dest("./tmp/assets"));
});
When I run this Gulp task, I get an error that states Error: Cannot find module 'phaser' from and then all the directories it search through (none of which are the bower_components directory).
Any ideas about how to package these up successfully are greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Answered my own question:
When using require in the Gulp task, you need to supply a path to a file, not just a name.
gulp.task("scripts-vendor", function () {
browserify()
.transform(debowerify)
.require("./bower_components/phaser/phaser.js")
.pipe(source("vendor.js"))
.pipe(gulp.dest("./tmp/assets"));
});
Notice that require("phaser") became require("./bower_components/phaser/phaser.js").
Doing this works, although the bundle takes forever to build (around 20 seconds). You're probably better of just loading giant libraries/frameworks directly into your app through a <script> tag and then using Browserify Shim.
This let's you require() (in the NodeJS/Browserify sense) global variables (documentation).
Seems like you figured out how to require the bower file. Hopefully you'll only have to bundle it once initially, and not every build. Including the library via a script tag isn't a bad idea. Another technique I'm using is to use scriptjs (a polyfill would work too), to async load whatever vender libraries I need, but make sure to include any/all require's after the script loads. For example, your index.js could be like:
$script.('/assets/vendor', function() {
var phaser = require('phaser');
//rest of code
});
It's especially nice for loading cdn files or having the ability to defer loading certain libraries that aren't necessarily used in the core app by every user, or loading libraries after client-side routing.
I know we could use requirejs combine files into one js file.
such like the following config.
module.exports = {
baseUrl: 'js/',
mainConfigFile: 'src/js/common.js',
dir: 'scripts/',
optimize: 'uglify2',
modules: [
{
name: 'common',
include: [
'jquery',
]
}
]
};
my result into one file is
common.js
----------------
jquery.js
modernizr.js
common.js
my question is, do we still need to put a require.js file in scripts folder and to use the following format
<script data-main="scripts/common" src="scripts/require.js"></script>
or we could just use
<script src="scripts/common.js"></script>
as files are compressed into one file?
You still need to load require.js the usual way to actually make use of the module loading benefits that it provides, and especially if you use the asynchronous functionality a lot. However, you can have a look at almond providing your code uses AMD and (from the README):
optimize all the modules into one file -- no dynamic code loading.
all modules have IDs and dependency arrays in their define() calls -- the RequireJS optimizer will take care of this for you.
only have one requirejs.config() or require.config() call.
do not use RequireJS multiversion support/contexts.
do not use require.toUrl() or require.nameToUrl().
do not use packages/packagePaths config. If you need to
use packages that have a main property,
volo can create an adapter module so
that it can work without this config. Use the amdify add command to
add the dependency to your project.
Almond is great because it doesn't need require.js at all; it wraps your own code with itself, which is a very minimal AMD loader skeleton and nowhere near as powerful as the main library. You then get a single optimised file that can be linked directly in your HTML:
<script src="scripts/common.js"></script>
The Gruntfile config for almond could look something like this:
compile: {
options: {
name: 'path/to/almond',
baseUrl: 'js',
include: ['main'],
insertRequire: ['main'],
mainConfigFile: 'scripts/config.js',
out: 'scripts/main.js',
optimizeAllPluginResources: true,
wrap: true
}
}
The above is all standard r.js boilerplate, you can find many more examples at the almond homepage.
I've got some paths configured in require-config.js as follows:
var require = {
baseUrl: '/javascript',
paths: {
'jquery': 'jquery/jquery-1.8.1.min'
// etc. -- several paths to vendor files here
},
}
I am trying to get the optimization working for deployment. The docs say I should have a build.js that looks something like this:
({
baseUrl: 'javascript',
paths: {
'jquery': 'jquery/jquery-1.8.1.min'
},
name: 'main',
out: 'main-build.js'
})
Is there a way to have the optimizer read my config file instead of (or in addition to) build.js? I don't want to have to manually keep the paths configured the same in both files if they change.
I tried to just run node r.js -o path/to/require-config.js, but it threw an error, "malformed: SyntaxError: Unexpected token var"
Edit: for clarification, my require-config.js file is the config only, not my main module. I did this so I could use the same configuration but load a different main module when unit testing.
You'll need to adjust the way your config options are defined. Taken from the RequireJS documentation:
In version 1.0.5+ of the optimizer, the mainConfigFile option can be used to specify the location of the runtime config. If specified with the path to your main JS file, the first requirejs({}), requirejs.config({}), require({}), or require.config({}) found in that file will be parsed out and used as part of the configuration options passed to the optimizer:
So basically you can point your r.js build file to your config options that will also be shared with the browser.
You will need to make use of the mainConfigFile option
For other's reference:
https://github.com/jrburke/r.js/blob/master/build/example.build.js
The build settings (no need to repeat your config.js lib inclusions here):
baseUrl: 'app',
name: 'assets/js/lib/almond', // or require
// Read config and then also build it into the app
mainConfigFile: 'app/config.js',
include: ['config'],
// Needed for almond (and does no harm for require)
wrap: true,
I'm using Nodejs grunt module. I know grunt min option minifies a files. But now I need to obfuscate files like google closure compiler. Does grunt have that feature?
The grunt min task allows you to set UglifyJS (the grunt min tool) options, which can give you greater control on how the destination file is mangled and compressed.
https://github.com/cowboy/grunt/blob/master/docs/task_min.md#specifying-uglifyjs-options
https://github.com/mishoo/UglifyJS
from the grunt task_min doc:
Specifying UglifyJS options
In this example, custom UglifyJS mangle, squeeze and codegen options are
specified. The listed methods and their expected options are explained in
the API section of the UglifyJS documentation:
The mangle object is passed into the pro.ast_mangle method.
The squeeze object is passed into the pro.ast_squeeze method.
The codegen object is passed into the pro.gen_code method.
// Project configuration.
grunt.initConfig({
min: {
dist: {
src: ['dist/built.js'],
dest: 'dist/built.min.js'
}
},
uglify: {
mangle: {toplevel: true},
squeeze: {dead_code: false},
codegen: {quote_keys: true}
}
});