Ah but you can do:

export function meta(key) {
return import.meta[key]:
}

On Aug 5, 2017 11:59 AM, "Dmitrii Dimandt" <dmit...@dmitriid.com> wrote:

> Import is already made to be a context-sensitive keyword
>
> I don’t think you can have a
>
> function x() {
>    import {x} from ‘module’;
> }
>
>
>
> On Sat, 05 Aug 2017 at 13:07 "T.J. Crowder" <">"T.J. Crowder" > wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 11:58 AM, Naveen Chawla
>> <naveen.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > How is `document` and `window` handled when someone does
>> > `const document =` ?
>>
>> At global scope in a script body, in a browser context, it's an error,
>> as you presumably know, because `document` is already declared.
>>
>> > It would seem perfectly fine to allow `module` to be masked by
>> > other variables, and if someone wants to use the module-global
>> > `module`, they can just rename in order to get access.
>>
>> Yes. That's what I said.
>>
>> The issue with it being an identifier isn't shadowing. It's that then
>> it's a binding with a value, and that value can be passed around,
>> which I suspect isn't okay.
>>
>> For clarity: To get `module`, either:
>>
>> 1. It's a context-sensitive keyword, and code that's using it needs to
>> be updated when migrated to a module.
>>
>> 2. It's an identifier, which means its value can be passed around.
>>
>> All I've said, again, is: I *suspect* that having it be an identifier
>> is a non-starter. But perhaps you can get support for a
>> context-sensitive keyword, if people feel it's worth the complexity
>> for mildly-improved semantics.
>>
>> -- T.J. Crowder
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss@mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

Reply via email to