ModuleImport

[Mark S. Miller]

If it had good enough support for circular dependencies, would we be able
to make sense of "module-as-module" designs?


On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Kevin Smith <zenparsing at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> My recommendation is to drop the default export feature and leave
>> everything else as is (except perhaps for making module.x equivalent to x
>> per Andreas).  Given that the current module system has far better support
>> for circular dependencies than "module-as-module" designs, the static
>> export design should be retained.
>>
>
> er, "module-as-object" designs : )
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>


-- 
    Cheers,
    --MarkM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20140701/bb19807c/attachment.html>