Geoffrey Booth

> Just a thought, nodejs has an [experimental loaders](https://nodejs.org/docs/latest/api/esm.html#esm_experimental_loaders) feature. Why not model the public compiler api after this? Hi, just noticed this. FYI, I’m responsible for much of the...

+1

Thanks, there’s also https://github.com/nodejs/loaders-test/tree/main/coffeescript-loader which is more of the reference implementation (did you base yours off of this, or of the example in the Node docs?). I need to work...

An issue is that `get` is a really common function name. It’s not an edge case to have code like this: ```coffee import { get } from 'http' get 'url',...

We have the precedent that `@method` means “static.” We could maybe expand that a little and treat `@@get` as a way to output the `get` keyword; and likewise for `static`...

I’m not convinced that decorators will ever reach Stage 4 😉 but sure, we shouldn’t preclude a syntax that would work for them. In https://github.com/tc39/proposal-decorators#class-fields there are examples of a...

If `@@get`/`@@set` get “reserved” then wouldn’t that mean you couldn’t have a decorator named `get`? I don’t think we want to require that, just like we don’t want to prevent...

So you couldn’t have a decorator named `get` followed by `:`, but it seems like currently you can’t have _any_ decorator followed by `:`, so this would be a restriction...

Well, is `@@get` / `@@set` the best syntax? I don’t mean to shut down discussion if anyone else has any alternatives. In my mind “leading colon then identifier” or `:label`...

Sorry if I left the impression that I thought we should definitely add all those things. I was trying to sketch out what the syntaxes would be _if_ they all...