#2 was removed at the hallway discussion of the face to face meeting. Do
you still think we should remove #3?


On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Kevin Smith <zenparsing at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Good observation. However, if I were to simplify, I’d only keep #3. #1 and
>> #2 look more syntactically questionable to me (kind of abusing names as
>> keywords/markers).
>>
>
> #1 is the base case because it is completely general.  Any IdentifierName
> may appear in the "as" clause.
>
>     export { x as delete, y as new, z as default }; // Perfectly fine!
>
> Of course, "default" has special meaning on the import side:
>
>     import x from "package:foo";
>
> Desugars (very beautifully) to:
>
>     import { default as x } from "package:foo";
>
> The sugaring on the import side is a clear win, but I'm not so sure about
> the sugarings on the export side.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>


-- 
erik
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20131205/807a2f39/attachment.html>

\#2 was removed at the hallway discussion of the face to face meeting. Do
you still think we should remove #3?