import.meta and TC39 process as a whole

Naveen Chawla naveen.chwl at
Sat Aug 5 15:47:12 UTC 2017

Yes although it could be implemented like an object & function underneath
even if it's not officially exposed as one.

I think the key question is for interested TC39 members - whether passing
it around must be expressly disallowed or allowed. If allowed, `module` is
the only choice that won't go against the existing advice against
identifiers being keywords (besides being a more suitable name anyway). If
it must be expressly disallowed, `import` would be the compromise choice.

A use-case for passing it somewhere might be to a static helper function
which lives in another module, and which might use the `meta` information,
and which carries out the import whose parameter is based on some logic
that is repeated throughout the app.

Reasons for disallowing this must come from TC39 - till then I'm stumped

On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 at 19:10 T.J. Crowder <tj.crowder at>

> On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Naveen Chawla <naveen.chwl at>
> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the link! That means that `import` is already on the
> borderline of the spec since it wants to be a function and object.
> No, not at all. It's a keyword. `import.meta` doesn't make `import` an
> object, any more than `` makes `new` an object.
> -- T.J. Crowder
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list