From: es-discuss <[email protected]> on behalf of C. Scott Ananian
<[email protected]>
> If we're cutting things from the ES6 module spec, can we consider cutting the
> magical mutable `import {foo} from "./foo";` bindings as well? Experience
> has shown that the rare cases where circular dependencies are intended and
> used can deal with the overhead of prefixing the module object.
Yes, please. Strong +1. As long as we're in the magical land of theorycraft
where we're dropping features of consensus-modules, and completely off the
topic of the OP: let's drop mutable bindings, and keep default exports.
>Personally, I would like to introduce mutable bindings as a future
>language-level feature, not as some weird wart on the module design.
I would rather never introduce them at all. But I agree with the sentiment that
having them sneak in through the module syntax backdoor is silly.
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
