Use polyfill.io ? about neverbuild

[Grsmto]

@rafaelderolez made the experience yesterday again of that being useful. You just save so much time no having to fix undebuggable IE10 issues...
I think for light/static/simple websites it's fine to have it by default and for more advanced apps we can custom polyfill it.

[piersolenski]

I agree it's awesome but I don't think it should be an integral part of the index.html, however fast it is it's still a blocking script so should use it as and when needed. It pollyfills everything the browser doesn't have by default unless otherwise specified, which can be potentially overkill. To be used as and when needed I would say - unless you want to add it but commented out by default?

[piersolenski]

Although on further thought, CRA/Neverbuild does polyfill a bunch of stuff in config/pollyfills.js whether we like it or not, so maybe we should remove that in favour of polyfill.io after all...

[Grsmto]

Yeah we should remove the default polyfill maybe and integrate polyfill.io as commented out. Seems like a good solution. It needs to be in the readme as well so people are aware they need to set it up...

…

On 26 Feb 2017 11:15 am, "Piers Olenski" ***@***.***> wrote: Although on further thought, CRA/Neverbuild does polyfill a bunch of stuff in config/pollyfills.js whether we like it or not, so maybe we should remove that in favour of polyfill.io after all... — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#34 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAgMx30E9E4WSl1ViXRaC6xDysUfGunbks5rgYkagaJpZM4LBqrI> .

[piersolenski]

#45