This was the point I was explaining here:
https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2010-May/011162.html
Modules are static entities, whose structure is known at compile-time. The
"module" form creates these static bindings. But they can be reflected as
first-class values. (Similar to e.g. classes in Java and proposed ES4.)
The "import" form, like "var" and "const" and "function" creates a binding to a
first-class value, whereas the "module" form creates a static module binding.
So when you write:
var x = Math;
you create a variable binding to the reflected first-class module value.
Whereas when you write:
module x = Math;
you are creating a static module binding x which is bound to the static module
bound to Math.
Dave
On May 16, 2010, at 9:15 PM, Kevin Curtis wrote:
> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 3:27 AM, David Herman <[email protected]> wrote:
>> This makes it very convenient to reflect them as first-class values:
>>
>> var x = Math;
>> alert(x["sum"]); // function(x,y) { ... }
>> alert(x["thisIsNotDefined"]); // undefined
>>
>
> Whats the difference between:
> var x = Math; // or: const x = Math;
>
> And:
> module x = Math;
>
> Thanks.
> --
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
