Darien Valentine (2018-01-25T08:31:47.000Z)
> There might also be occasions when we want to do something like this:
>
>    const { bar } = foo,
>          { baz, blah } = bar;
>
> Here, we might find it useful to get deconstructed references to both bar
and its properties baz and blah, but we have to do it in two steps.

Unless I’m misunderstanding what you mean, doing this in a single pattern
is already accounted for:

    const { bar, bar: { baz, blah } } = foo;

There’s no restriction on the number of times the key appears.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20180125/7d51dd1b/attachment-0001.html>
valentinium at gmail.com (2018-01-25T08:33:10.790Z)
> There might also be occasions when we want to do something like this:
>
> ```
> const { bar } = foo,
>       { baz, blah } = bar;
> ```
>
> Here, we might find it useful to get deconstructed references to both bar and its properties baz and blah, but we have to do it in two steps.

Unless I’m misunderstanding what you mean, doing this in a single pattern is already accounted for:

    const { bar, bar: { baz, blah } } = foo;

There’s no restriction on the number of times the key appears.
valentinium at gmail.com (2018-01-25T08:32:55.413Z)
> There might also be occasions when we want to do something like this:
>
> ```
> const { bar } = foo,
>       { baz, blah } = bar;
> ```
>
> Here, we might find it useful to get deconstructed references to both bar

and its properties baz and blah, but we have to do it in two steps.

Unless I’m misunderstanding what you mean, doing this in a single pattern
is already accounted for:

    const { bar, bar: { baz, blah } } = foo;

There’s no restriction on the number of times the key appears.