If you intend to use both Rollup and `import *`, be aware that when rollup's current approach, as I understand it, is either a) it statically knows with confidence which names off a ModuleRecord you use, and treeshakes the rest out; or b) it knows with confidence that you're reflecting on the ModuleRecord, and treeshakes nothing, or c) it's not certain, so it treeshakes out named exports that you may be relying on.
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 9:00 PM, Isiah Meadows <[email protected]> wrote: > And Rollup already does this (although with less dramatic renaming). > > On Fri, Dec 15, 2017, 23:40 Jérémy Judéaux <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> One of the first assumptions in this discussion is that “Star imports >> prevent treeshaking” >> >> >> >> But thinking about it, I don’t see why tools cannot transform >> >> ```js >> >> import * as L from './lib'; >> >> console.log(L.foo, L.bar()); >> >> ``` >> >> To >> >> ```js >> >> import {foo as $$generated$$1$$foo$$, bar as $$generated$$1$$bar$$} from >> './lib'; >> >> console.log($$generated$$1$$foo$$, $$generated$$1$$bar$$()); >> >> ``` >> >> And then apply tree-shaking. As long as the code doesn’t contain >> something like `Object.keys(L)` it should be fine. >> >> >> >> At least that’s for the concept, maybe tools have better ways to do it. >> >> So I tried, webpack 3 + babel 7 beta. And it works. A very big function I >> put inside my lib.js only get exported if I use `Object.keys(L)` >> >> >> >> With treeshaking working with star imports, are there still benefits of >> the proposed syntax? >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >> > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
