Hey Matthew,
This is another pattern I could take yup.
Kevin pointed that if I suck it up and move all my modules toward named-exports
then my problems go away too. The reason I am using default internally was that
I had modules depending on others which are all uniformly single-function
modules (react components to be specific). So it felt confusing to have this
syntax internally:
import { foo } from ‘../foo’
When what I’m really trying to express is:
import foo from ‘../foo’
But ultimately if I am willing to accept that internally I use the former
syntax then my re-export expressions are fine:
export * from ‘./foo'
These are small details but added up they matter. Generally I’m happy with
modules though. The only other gripe I have is not being able to import each
export naked into a namespace like this:
import * from ‘./foo’
Haskell etc. allow this (actually its a bit richer/better but yeah, basically).
Often namespacing is what you want, not always.
Jason
> On Feb 19, 2015, at 12:29 PM, Matthew Robb <matthewwr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Just curious if this meets the use cases being discussed here, @caridy
> @jason ?
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 9:22 AM, Matthew Robb <matthewwr...@gmail.com
> <mailto:matthewwr...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> import a from "a";
> import b from "b";
>
> export { a, b };
>
>
>
>
>
> - Matthew Robb
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
