Discuss
  • Make things like Reflect an import instead of a global?

Make things like Reflect an import instead of a global?

# /#!/JoePea (8 years ago)

Seems like when the ES6 Modules became official that it would be a good idea to not define more globals in the language, and instead spec things to be modules, f.e. something like:

import {apply} from 'Reflect'
// insead of
const {apply} = window.Reflect

This would also be a pattern for programs that use the JS engine to follow:

import {define} from 'CustomElements' // in browsers
// instead of
const {define} = window.customElements

Maybe a symbol would be needed for any modules that are native?

import {define} from '#CustomElements' // # means native module
# Jordan Harband (8 years ago)

We don't yet have a mechanism for built-in modules, and that's not going to be an obstacle for continuing to improve the language.

As soon as a viable mechanism and precedent exists for that, new things very well might only be added via that mechanism, rather than solely by adding new global things.

# /#!/JoePea (8 years ago)

True, I understand we can't practically do it at the moment since native module systems aren't implemented yet. I guess I am simply expressing that it would be awesome and that I can't wait for that to happen sooner than later so that new awesome features/tools can be modules instead of globals.

The part that gives me a tiny bit of despair is that if something is released as a global, then it will stay that way essentially forever, for backwards compatibility. That is the part that makes me feel a tiny bit bad inside considering that the amazing language for modules is already defined.

# Alican Çubukçuoğlu (8 years ago)

FYI, there is a discussion on built-in modules here: tc39/ecma262#395

# Kris Siegel (8 years ago)

Are there any proposals regarding built-in module mechanisms or at least someone to champion it during ECMA meetings? Similar to Joe's point if this isn't a blocking issue then releasing item after item into the global scope means they are stuck there forever (unless something like "use stricter"; or whatever other silliness is added to gate the changes). This seems to me like it shouldn't be that hard to do if someone is championing / proposing.

# Isiah Meadows (8 years ago)

I don't believe there's a formal proposal yet, but there definitely should be. It's been discussed frequently for years by the standards leaders; it's just that we're 1. still waiting on a loader spec for modules to complete (the WHATWG spec is still a work in progress, with quite a bit of recent flux), and 2. a standard library isn't exactly a trivial thing to design.

# /#!/JoePea (8 years ago)

Hehe, well, making everything a global is one way to design it. ;} Can't wait for modules to be native!