valentinium at gmail.com (2017-12-13T21:28:22.142Z)
> Those {} that you see in the export and import statements are not
> objects, it is just syntax. Yes, I know, people confuse them with objects,
> until they realize they aren’t. We probably should have chosen a different
> syntax to signal that it is a binding from the module’s environment record.
Not sure about the other folks here, but I wasn’t under the impression that
the braces were an object literal or a binding pattern — though obviously
`* from 'foo'` does return the module namespace exotic object. The idea I
think is that it would be useful to extend NamespaceImport to permit
retrieving a filtered view of the MNSEO that exposes only the specified
bindings. I see that it’s novel because (correct me if I’m wrong) the same
MNSEO instance is returned for namespace imports across multiple importing
modules and is observably the same reference; currently it’s just "create
the first time, retrieve thereafter". So here we’d be explicitly requesting
a new object even if the module instance is already loaded, yes — but
presumably it would be a new MNSEO (or proxy thereof) with the usual
binding semantics, not a pojo.
> Those {} that you see in the export and import statements are not objects, it is just syntax. Yes, I know, people confuse them with objects, until they realize they aren’t. We probably should have chosen a different syntax to signal that it is a binding from the module’s environment record. Not sure about the other folks here, but I wasn’t under the impression that the braces were an object literal or a binding pattern — though obviously `* from 'foo'` does return the module namespace exotic object. The idea I think is that it would be useful to extend NamespaceImport to permit retrieving a filtered view of the MNSEO that exposes only the specified bindings. I see that it’s novel because (correct me if I’m wrong) the same MNSEO instance is returned for namespace imports across multiple importing modules and is observably the same reference; currently it’s just "create the first time, retrieve thereafter". So here we’d be explicitly requesting a new object even if the module instance is already loaded, yes — but presumably it would be a new MNSEO (or proxy thereof) with the usual binding semantics, not a pojo. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20171213/ac3e2cd8/attachment.html>