Allow @:native("") with empty string

[eduardo-costa]

Using "native" give us freedom to do stuff like:
@:native("(require('mongodb').MongoClient)")
The resulting code will be " x = new (require('mongodb').MongoClient)(...)"
So far so good, but:
There are some global functions (like 'require' in nodejs) that do not have an object to give access to it.

It would be interesting to create a "context class" with native("") that will compile its attributes "free" of classes scope.

Something like this:

@:native("")
extern class NodeJS
{
@:native("require")
static function require(s:String):Dynamic;
}

Currently Haxe generates this JS:

.hx [ x = NodeJS.require("module"); ]
.js [ x = .require("module") ]

The "." spoils the fun. I think that the native("") could be a special case without the "."

This way things like this:

static public function require(p_lib : String):Dynamic { return untyped js("require(p_lib)"); }

Would not be necessary.

[ncannasse]

This would not work, because "require" might be a user local variable, so that would easily break.
One other option is to have static inline function require(s) { return untyped __js__('require')(s); } but with the same issue

[eduardo-costa]

I understand.
But how to cover this case of global functions, without resorting to wrapping the function with the same definition.
Because in nodejs if the user uses a local variable called 'require' he would fall in the same error anyway.

[frabbit]

There is currently no good solution, see #1492

[eduardo-costa]

Sincerely adapting the @:native("") to simply hiding the '.' would solve the problem of global functions.
Local variables conflicting with global stuff is normal.. reserved words will always cause these issues anyway.
But no problem.. this isn't really an urgent issue.