>
>
>> I don't understand this claim, any legal AssignmentExpression form is
>> allowed.
>>
>>
>>> I've said this before, but without the equals it looks too much like a
>>> declaration:
>>>
>>>     export default class C {}
>>>     var c = new C(); // No C defined, WTF?
>>>
>>
>> Why is this surprising?
>>
>
> It is surprising because it looks like it should work like
>   export class C {}
> The keyword 'default' looks like a modifier like 'const'.
>

I completely agree with this. It looks like a modifier. In addition to not
having an = or some other reason to think it will be evaluated as an
expression, "default" *is* a reserved word *and* has special significance
here. Yes, it is grammatically unambiguous and can be learned, but this is
a question of intuition. The meaning here goes very strongly against my
intuition.


>
>
>
>>
>> If a developer knows how named function expression bindings work today,
>> this won't be a big surprise.
>>
>
> I know how named function expressions work and it's still surprising.
>

Same here.

If anything, I would say that it makes more sense to go ahead and run with
the intuition we seem to be feeling with is that it seems like a modifier
of the export. So maybe like:

    export default class C {}
    var c = new C(); //works

    export default function f(){}
    f(); //works

    export default let obj = {a:1,b:2};
    var a = obj.a; //works
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20140314/7055e8f9/attachment.html>

> It is surprising because it looks like it should work like
> ```js
> export class C {}
> ```
> The keyword 'default' looks like a modifier like 'const'.

I completely agree with this. It looks like a modifier. In addition to not
having an = or some other reason to think it will be evaluated as an
expression, "default" *is* a reserved word *and* has special significance
here. Yes, it is grammatically unambiguous and can be learned, but this is
a question of intuition. The meaning here goes very strongly against my
intuition.

> I know how named function expressions work and it's still surprising.

Same here.

If anything, I would say that it makes more sense to go ahead and run with
the intuition we seem to be feeling with is that it seems like a modifier
of the export. So maybe like:

    export default class C {}
    var c = new C(); //works

    export default function f(){}
    f(); //works

    export default let obj = {a:1,b:2};
    var a = obj.a; //works