May I ask what the use case for exporting symbol-named values is? I can't seem to think of any obvious one.
On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:29 PM, Dean Landolt <[email protected]> wrote: > [snip] > >> >> So if you export an opaque identity that you created yourself, and don't >> expose some mechanism for downstream consumers to know what it means, you're >> handing a bag of meaningless tokens which are, by definition, completely >> useless to them. > > > I should add: if you only intend to default-export a *single* symbol, this > is not semantically meaningless. It may be possible to infer some kind of > meaning from the module path of the import. I'm not convinced this is > valuable, but it seems like something which could be made to work. > > My point only holds when not doing a default-export of a symbol -- e.g. > using symbol keys on a default-exported object or using unregistered symbols > as export bindings (if this were even possible). > > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > -- Isiah Meadows _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
