Default exports, without explicit syntactic support

Marius Gundersen gundersen at
Thu Jun 26 06:54:53 PDT 2014

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Kevin Smith <zenparsing at> wrote:

>  The underlying problem is default exports - it's just plain confusing to
> users.
I agree

What do you think?  Is there any user experience issue here that needs to
> be sugared over?
> Notice that, on the import side, *exports overriding in Node is an
> equivalent user experience to normal importing in ES modules*.
> Therefore, my conclusion is that syntactic support for "default exports"
> does not provide any measurable improvement in user experience.  On the
> other hand, default exports is clearly confusing to users.  The balance
> seems clear to me:  default exports needs to be dropped from the design.
> Feedback?  Counter-arguments?

I think this is a great suggestion.

The only thing I want to add that it should be possible to import the
collection of exports (the bag) and named values from the bag:

import _, {map, reduce, filter} from "underscore";

assert(_.fiilter === filter);


Marius Gundersen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list