On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Kevin Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but the perspective says: "why would I need to > import the multiple-exports if I'm specifically overriding the exports with > a default? Having a way to import both the default and multiple-exports is > silly and confusing." > For my part, my personal perspective is, "I have a module named `foo`. I want to write `foo.bar` to get the export named bar. I don't care *what* `foo` is. Perhaps its a function object for backwards-compatibility. Perhaps it's a module object because of some circular dependency. Perhaps it's a plain object. To me it's just a namespace. Please let me use the same import syntax regardless. In exchange, I promise never to use bare `foo` in my code." There are a couple of different solutions; default-default is one of those. --scott
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
