Stuck on an issue?

Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.

And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.

Do not assume browserify

See original GitHub issue

Would it be possible not to assume the use of browserify? It would just mean:

Not assuming global is available
Using a UMD pattern

Thanks!

Issue Analytics

State:
Created 10 years ago
Comments:7 (3 by maintainers)

Top GitHub Comments

3reactions

marekjaloveccommented, Jan 21, 2016

at least fix global variable please, it’s breaking build for webpack users https://github.com/mozilla/nunjucks/issues/520

0reactions

juandopazocommented, May 28, 2014

👍

Top Results From Across the Web

Browserify does not make require available - Stack Overflow

I am building a webapp with node.js and express. I want to use Browserify to make my local modules available in the browser....

npm, Browserify & Modules - Ampersand.js - Learn

This is a quick run down of npm and browserify if you haven't used them before. The below assumes you have installed npm...

Supported technologies: Browserify - Wallaby.js

You don't need to specify any output options because wallabify doesn't use concatenated bundle. While concatenating files is beneficial for a production ...

Browserify vs Webpack - freeCodeCamp

In the land of JavaScript, no one is king for long. ... Webpack assumes you need to move files from a source directory...

How to use with browserify/ strict mode? - Google Groups

mithril.js:1 Uncaught ReferenceError: m is not defined. I think it may be because browserify wraps everything with. function() {"use strict";...}.