On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Naveen Chawla <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think it has to be an identifier, especially given proposals > like `meta`, dynamic functionality etc.
There's a slight misunderstanding here about the term "identifier" that may be preventing your fully understanding what I'm saying. `import` isn't, and cannot be, an identifier, because it's a keyword. See the [Identifiers section][1] of the spec. This is the fundamental difference between `import` and `document` (or perhaps more properly [since `document` isn't a JavaScript thing], between `import` and, say, `undefined` or `Symbol`). Understanding the difference between an identifier and a keyword may help you understand better what I'm saying regarding why `module` *as an identifier* might be a problem. I'll leave the question of whether passing that identifier's value around would be a problem to people more familiar with the complexities of the import mechanisms. As I've said several times now: I *suspect* it's a problem, I don't *know* that it is. -- T.J. Crowder [1]: http://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/8.0/index.html#sec-identifiers
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
