Having a version of almond.js with unordered set to true by default about almond

[jrburke]

This might make sense. I normally like just distributing one file, just because it keeps it simple. But I'm open to it. @pmuellr, would this be useful for you? @gtanner any thoughts? This might have saved you some trouble.

[alexlawrence]

Hi again,

we don´t have this issue anymore since yesterday. Since we are also using require.js and had to do some configuration for it we ran into the same issue. So we figured how to ensure the following order: amd tool -> amd tool configuration -> amd modules.

Stay with the one file if nobody else needs it.

Great tools btw!

[pmuellr]

I've never understood why order was significant, unless there were side-effects in your "modules" - eg, code running outside the define() invocation - which required you to get things lined up in a particular order. But it's wrong to do that, so this should never be a problem.

So, I'd be in favor of removing all the code you have that assumes an order, and handles overrides for when you want "unordered", etc. Perhaps we can use these recovered bytes to implement issue #8? :-)

[gtanner]

I found working with almond in the "ordered" fashion to be awkward. I would expect that my modules are lazy loaded and the construction code isn't executed until the first require (which is the behavour unordered gives us).

I am with @pmuellr in that I seem to be missing the point of why order is significant. I also agree with @pmuellr that I would rather trade the added behavour in #8 with taking out the ordered define support

[jrburke]

The ordered behavior was to mimic traditional script loading in the browsers, and for the canonical example of requirejs use, there is a data-main="" on the script tag that is the original require(), so it is possible to construct apps with that approach that only use define(), never a top-level require. Since r.js orders the modules, unordered was not originally needed, and the code is a bit smaller if unordered is removed vs removing ordered.

To just go the unordered path, there would need to be a way for the data-main type of apps to tack on a require for that value, or something to trigger the modules to execute. I cringe at using a setTimeout() too. So the code to add to allow those triggers would likely cancel out any savings from removing the ordered path.

In any case, for this issue, I'll close it for now. I'm still reviewing/considering the feedback on #8 separately.