What is the reason for:
import something1 from './something1'
import something2 from './something2'
export default {
something1,
something2
}
export {
something1,
something2
}
?
And why isn't possible to do:
export default something
export something
Thank you.
For the case where you want individual module elements and a library namespace. If this were the old days:
import { extend } from "jquery";
import $ from "jquery";
One of these is importing a named export, and one of these is importing the default. Either is valid. But in general, the common practice is individual exports.
Because an export statement is either expecting you to declare the thing inline
export const something = ...
Which means that it can't be reassigned as default as well...
Or it's expecting you to export a batch of named values.
export default something;
export { something };
Related
I have referred all the questions in stackoverflow.
But none of the suggested why and when to use default export.
I just saw that default can be metioned "When there is only one export in a file"
Any other reason for using default export in es6 modules?
Some differences that might make you choose one over the other:
Named Exports
Can export multiple values
MUST use the exported name when importing
Default Exports
Export a single value
Can use any name when importing
This article does a nice job of explaining when it would be a good idea to use one over the other.
It's somewhat a matter of opinion, but there are some objective aspects to it:
You can have only one default export in a module, whereas you can have as many named exports as you like.
If you provide a default export, the programmer using it has to come up with a name for it. This can lead to inconsistency in a codebase, where Mary does
import example from "./example";
...but Joe does
import ex from "./example";
In contrast, with a named export, the programmer doesn't have to think about what to call it unless there's a conflict with another identifier in their module.¹ It's just
import { example } from "./example";
With a named export, the person importing it has to specify the name of what they're importing. They get a nice early error if they try to import something that doesn't exist.
If you consistently only use named exports, programmers importing from modules in the project don't have to think about whether what they want is the default or a named export.
¹ If there is a conflict (for instance, you want example from two different modules), you can use as to rename:
import { example as widgetExample } from "./widget/example";
import { example as gadgetExample } from "./gadget/example";
You should almost always favour named exports, default exports have many downsides
Problems with default exports:
Difficult to refactor or ensure consistency since they can be named anything in the codebase other than what its actually called
Difficult to analyze by automated tools or provide code intellisense and autocompletion
They break tree shaking as instead of importing the single function you want to use you're forcing webpack to import the entire file with whatever other dead code it has leading to bigger bundle sizes
You can't export more than a single export per file
You lose faster/direct access to imports
checkout these articles for a more detailed explanation:
https://blog.neufund.org/why-we-have-banned-default-exports-and-you-should-do-the-same-d51fdc2cf2ad
https://humanwhocodes.com/blog/2019/01/stop-using-default-exports-javascript-module/
https://rajeshnaroth.medium.com/avoid-es6-default-exports-a24142978a7a
With named exports, one can have multiple named exports per file. Then import the specific exports they want surrounded in braces. The name of imported module has to be the same as the name of the exported module.
// imports
// ex. importing a single named export
import { MyComponent } from "./MyComponent";
// ex. importing multiple named exports
import { MyComponent, MyComponent2 } from "./MyComponent";
// ex. giving a named import a different name by using "as":
import { MyComponent2 as MyNewComponent } from "./MyComponent";
// exports from ./MyComponent.js file
export const MyComponent = () => {}
export const MyComponent2 = () => {}
You can also alias named imports, assign a new name to a named export as you import it, allowing you to resolve naming collisions, or give the export a more informative name.
import MyComponent as MainComponent from "./MyComponent";
You can also Import all the named exports onto an object:
import * as MainComponents from "./MyComponent";
// use MainComponents.MyComponent and MainComponents.MyComponent2 here
One can have only one default export per file. When we import we have to specify a name and import like:
// import
import MyDefaultComponent from "./MyDefaultExport";
// export
const MyComponent = () => {}
export default MyComponent;
The naming of import is completely independent in default export and we can use any name we like.
From MDN:
Named exports are useful to export several values. During the import, one will be able to use the same name to refer to the corresponding value.
Concerning the default export, there is only a single default export per module. A default export can be a function, a class, an object or anything else. This value is to be considered as the “main” exported value since it will be the simplest to import.
There aren't any definitive rules, but there are some conventions that people use to make it easier to structure or share code.
When there is only one export in the entire file, there is no reason to make it named.
Also, when your module has one main purpose, it could make sense to make that your default export. In those cases you can extra named exports
In react for example, React is the default export, since that is often the only part that you need. You don't always Component, so that's a named export that you can import when needed.
import React, {Component} from 'react';
In the other cases where one module has multiple equal (or mostly equal) exports, it's better to use named exports
import { blue, red, green } from 'colors';
1st Method:-
export foo; //so that this can be used in other file
import {foo} from 'abc'; //importing data/fun from module
2nd Method:-
export default foo; //used in one file
import foo from 'blah'; //importing data/fun from module
3rd Method:-
export = foo;
import * as foo from 'blah';
The above methods roughly compile to the following syntax below:-
//all export methods
exports.foo = foo; //1st method
exports['default'] = foo; //2nd method
module.exports = foo; //3rd method
//all import methods
var foo = require('abc').foo; //1st method
var foo = require('abc')['default']; //2nd method
var foo = require('abc'); //3rd method
For more information, visit to Default keyword explaination
Note:- There can be only one export default in one file.
So whenever we are exporting only 1 function, then it's better to use default keyword while exporting
EASIEST DEFINITION TO CLEAR CONFUSIONS
Let us understand the export methods, first, so that we can analyze ourselves when to use what, or why do we do what we do.
Named exports: One or more exports per module. When there are more than one exports in a module, each named export must be restructured while importing. Since there could be either export in the same module and the compiler will not know which one is required unless we mention it.
//Named export , exporting:
export const xyz = () =>{
}
// while importing this
import {xyx} from 'path'
or
const {xyz} = require(path)
The braces are just restructuring the export object.
On the other hand , default exports are only one export per module , so they are pretty plain.
//exporting default
const xyz =() >{
};
export default xyz
//Importing
import xyz from 'path'
or
const xyz = require(path)
I hope this was pretty simple to understand, and by now you can understand why you import React modules within braces...
Named Export: (export)
With named exports, one can have multiple named exports per file. Then import the specific exports they want surrounded in braces. The name of imported module has to be the same as the name of the exported module.
// imports
// ex. importing a single named export
import { MyComponent } from "./MyComponent";
// ex. importing multiple named exports
import { MyComponent, MyComponent2 } from "./MyComponent";
// ex. giving a named import a different name by using "as":
import { MyComponent2 as MyNewComponent } from "./MyComponent";
// exports from ./MyComponent.js file
export const MyComponent = () => {}
export const MyComponent2 = () => {}
Import all the named exports onto an object:
// use MainComponents.MyComponent and MainComponents.MyComponent2 here
import * as MainComponents from "./MyComponent";
Default Export: (export default)
One can have only one default export per file. When we import we have to specify a name and import like:
// import
import MyDefaultComponent from "./MyDefaultExport";
// export
const MyComponent = () => {}
export default MyComponent;
Note: The naming of import is completely independent in default export and we can use any name we like.
Here's a great answer that explains default and named imports in ES6
When using
export { module } from 'path'
This doesn't work specially with default exports
but when importing then exporting no problem
in index.js
import module from path
export {module}
I'm i missing something
If you want to re-export a default export as a named one, you can use the following syntax
export {default as module} from './path
Alternatively, if you want to export all named export in a single export, you can use
export {* as module} from './path'
Simply because this syntax does not deal with default exports only named ones
What is the difference in TypeScript between export and default export?
In all the tutorials, I see people exporting their classes and I cannot compile my code if I don't add the default keyword before exporting.
Also, I couldn't find any trace of the default export keyword in the official TypeScript documentation.
export class MyClass {
collection = [1,2,3];
}
Does not compile. But:
export default class MyClass {
collection = [1,2,3];
}
Does.
The error is:
error TS1192: Module '"src/app/MyClass"' has no default export.
Default Export (export default)
// MyClass.ts -- using default export
export default class MyClass { /* ... */ }
The main difference is that you can only have one default export per file and you import it like so:
import MyClass from "./MyClass";
You can give it any name you like. For example this works fine:
import MyClassAlias from "./MyClass";
Named Export (export)
// MyClass.ts -- using named exports
export class MyClass { /* ... */ }
export class MyOtherClass { /* ... */ }
When you use a named export, you can have multiple exports per file and you need to import the exports surrounded in braces:
import { MyClass } from "./MyClass";
Note: Adding the braces will fix the error you're describing in your question and the name specified in the braces needs to match the name of the export.
Or say your file exported multiple classes, then you could import both like so:
import { MyClass, MyOtherClass } from "./MyClass";
// use MyClass and MyOtherClass
Or you could give either of them a different name in this file:
import { MyClass, MyOtherClass as MyOtherClassAlias } from "./MyClass";
// use MyClass and MyOtherClassAlias
Or you could import everything that's exported by using * as:
import * as MyClasses from "./MyClass";
// use MyClasses.MyClass and MyClasses.MyOtherClass here
Which to use?
In ES6, default exports are concise because their use case is more common; however, when I am working on code internal to a project in TypeScript, I prefer to use named exports instead of default exports almost all the time because it works very well with code refactoring. For example, if you default export a class and rename that class, it will only rename the class in that file and not any of the other references in other files. With named exports it will rename the class and all the references to that class in all the other files.
It also plays very nicely with barrel files (files that use namespace exports—export *—to export other files). An example of this is shown in the "example" section of this answer.
Note that my opinion on using named exports even when there is only one export is contrary to the TypeScript Handbook—see the "Red Flags" section. I believe this recommendation only applies when you are creating an API for other people to use and the code is not internal to your project. When I'm designing an API for people to use, I'll use a default export so people can do import myLibraryDefaultExport from "my-library-name";. If you disagree with me about doing this, I would love to hear your reasoning.
That said, find what you prefer! You could use one, the other, or both at the same time.
Additional Points
A default export is actually a named export with the name default, so if the file has a default export then you can also import by doing:
import { default as MyClass } from "./MyClass";
And take note these other ways to import exist:
import MyDefaultExportedClass, { Class1, Class2 } from "./SomeFile";
import MyDefaultExportedClass, * as Classes from "./SomeFile";
import "./SomeFile"; // runs SomeFile.js without importing any exports
I was trying to solve the same problem, but found an interesting advice by Basarat Ali Syed, of TypeScript Deep Dive fame, that we should avoid the generic export default declaration for a class, and instead append the export tag to the class declaration. The imported class should be instead listed in the import command of the module.
That is: instead of
class Foo {
// ...
}
export default Foo;
and the simple import Foo from './foo'; in the module that will import, one should use
export class Foo {
// ...
}
and import {Foo} from './foo' in the importer.
The reason for that is difficulties in the refactoring of classes, and the added work for exportation. The original post by Basarat is in Avoid Export Default
Named export
In TypeScript you can export with the export keyword. It then can be imported via import {name} from "./mydir";. This is called a named export. A file can export multiple named exports. Also the names of the imports have to match the exports. For example:
// foo.js file
export class foo{}
export class bar{}
// main.js file in same dir
import {foo, bar} from "./foo";
The following alternative syntax is also valid:
// foo.js file
function foo() {};
function bar() {};
export {foo, bar};
// main.js file in same directory
import {foo, bar} from './foo'
Default export
We can also use a default export. There can only be one default export per file. When importing a default export we omit the square brackets in the import statement. We can also choose our own name for our import.
// foo.js file
export default class foo{}
// main.js file in same directory
import abc from "./foo";
It's just JavaScript
Modules and their associated keyword like import, export, and export default are JavaScript constructs, not TypeScript. However, TypeScript added the exporting and importing of interfaces and type aliases to it.
Here's an example with simple object exporting.
var MyScreen = {
/* ... */
width : function (percent){
return window.innerWidth / 100 * percent
}
height : function (percent){
return window.innerHeight / 100 * percent
}
};
export default MyScreen
In the main file (use it when you don't want and don't need to create a new instance) and it is not global, you will import this only when it is needed:
import MyScreen from "./module/screen";
console.log(MyScreen.width(100));
I have referred all the questions in stackoverflow.
But none of the suggested why and when to use default export.
I just saw that default can be metioned "When there is only one export in a file"
Any other reason for using default export in es6 modules?
Some differences that might make you choose one over the other:
Named Exports
Can export multiple values
MUST use the exported name when importing
Default Exports
Export a single value
Can use any name when importing
This article does a nice job of explaining when it would be a good idea to use one over the other.
It's somewhat a matter of opinion, but there are some objective aspects to it:
You can have only one default export in a module, whereas you can have as many named exports as you like.
If you provide a default export, the programmer using it has to come up with a name for it. This can lead to inconsistency in a codebase, where Mary does
import example from "./example";
...but Joe does
import ex from "./example";
In contrast, with a named export, the programmer doesn't have to think about what to call it unless there's a conflict with another identifier in their module.¹ It's just
import { example } from "./example";
With a named export, the person importing it has to specify the name of what they're importing. They get a nice early error if they try to import something that doesn't exist.
If you consistently only use named exports, programmers importing from modules in the project don't have to think about whether what they want is the default or a named export.
¹ If there is a conflict (for instance, you want example from two different modules), you can use as to rename:
import { example as widgetExample } from "./widget/example";
import { example as gadgetExample } from "./gadget/example";
You should almost always favour named exports, default exports have many downsides
Problems with default exports:
Difficult to refactor or ensure consistency since they can be named anything in the codebase other than what its actually called
Difficult to analyze by automated tools or provide code intellisense and autocompletion
They break tree shaking as instead of importing the single function you want to use you're forcing webpack to import the entire file with whatever other dead code it has leading to bigger bundle sizes
You can't export more than a single export per file
You lose faster/direct access to imports
checkout these articles for a more detailed explanation:
https://blog.neufund.org/why-we-have-banned-default-exports-and-you-should-do-the-same-d51fdc2cf2ad
https://humanwhocodes.com/blog/2019/01/stop-using-default-exports-javascript-module/
https://rajeshnaroth.medium.com/avoid-es6-default-exports-a24142978a7a
With named exports, one can have multiple named exports per file. Then import the specific exports they want surrounded in braces. The name of imported module has to be the same as the name of the exported module.
// imports
// ex. importing a single named export
import { MyComponent } from "./MyComponent";
// ex. importing multiple named exports
import { MyComponent, MyComponent2 } from "./MyComponent";
// ex. giving a named import a different name by using "as":
import { MyComponent2 as MyNewComponent } from "./MyComponent";
// exports from ./MyComponent.js file
export const MyComponent = () => {}
export const MyComponent2 = () => {}
You can also alias named imports, assign a new name to a named export as you import it, allowing you to resolve naming collisions, or give the export a more informative name.
import MyComponent as MainComponent from "./MyComponent";
You can also Import all the named exports onto an object:
import * as MainComponents from "./MyComponent";
// use MainComponents.MyComponent and MainComponents.MyComponent2 here
One can have only one default export per file. When we import we have to specify a name and import like:
// import
import MyDefaultComponent from "./MyDefaultExport";
// export
const MyComponent = () => {}
export default MyComponent;
The naming of import is completely independent in default export and we can use any name we like.
From MDN:
Named exports are useful to export several values. During the import, one will be able to use the same name to refer to the corresponding value.
Concerning the default export, there is only a single default export per module. A default export can be a function, a class, an object or anything else. This value is to be considered as the “main” exported value since it will be the simplest to import.
There aren't any definitive rules, but there are some conventions that people use to make it easier to structure or share code.
When there is only one export in the entire file, there is no reason to make it named.
Also, when your module has one main purpose, it could make sense to make that your default export. In those cases you can extra named exports
In react for example, React is the default export, since that is often the only part that you need. You don't always Component, so that's a named export that you can import when needed.
import React, {Component} from 'react';
In the other cases where one module has multiple equal (or mostly equal) exports, it's better to use named exports
import { blue, red, green } from 'colors';
1st Method:-
export foo; //so that this can be used in other file
import {foo} from 'abc'; //importing data/fun from module
2nd Method:-
export default foo; //used in one file
import foo from 'blah'; //importing data/fun from module
3rd Method:-
export = foo;
import * as foo from 'blah';
The above methods roughly compile to the following syntax below:-
//all export methods
exports.foo = foo; //1st method
exports['default'] = foo; //2nd method
module.exports = foo; //3rd method
//all import methods
var foo = require('abc').foo; //1st method
var foo = require('abc')['default']; //2nd method
var foo = require('abc'); //3rd method
For more information, visit to Default keyword explaination
Note:- There can be only one export default in one file.
So whenever we are exporting only 1 function, then it's better to use default keyword while exporting
EASIEST DEFINITION TO CLEAR CONFUSIONS
Let us understand the export methods, first, so that we can analyze ourselves when to use what, or why do we do what we do.
Named exports: One or more exports per module. When there are more than one exports in a module, each named export must be restructured while importing. Since there could be either export in the same module and the compiler will not know which one is required unless we mention it.
//Named export , exporting:
export const xyz = () =>{
}
// while importing this
import {xyx} from 'path'
or
const {xyz} = require(path)
The braces are just restructuring the export object.
On the other hand , default exports are only one export per module , so they are pretty plain.
//exporting default
const xyz =() >{
};
export default xyz
//Importing
import xyz from 'path'
or
const xyz = require(path)
I hope this was pretty simple to understand, and by now you can understand why you import React modules within braces...
Named Export: (export)
With named exports, one can have multiple named exports per file. Then import the specific exports they want surrounded in braces. The name of imported module has to be the same as the name of the exported module.
// imports
// ex. importing a single named export
import { MyComponent } from "./MyComponent";
// ex. importing multiple named exports
import { MyComponent, MyComponent2 } from "./MyComponent";
// ex. giving a named import a different name by using "as":
import { MyComponent2 as MyNewComponent } from "./MyComponent";
// exports from ./MyComponent.js file
export const MyComponent = () => {}
export const MyComponent2 = () => {}
Import all the named exports onto an object:
// use MainComponents.MyComponent and MainComponents.MyComponent2 here
import * as MainComponents from "./MyComponent";
Default Export: (export default)
One can have only one default export per file. When we import we have to specify a name and import like:
// import
import MyDefaultComponent from "./MyDefaultExport";
// export
const MyComponent = () => {}
export default MyComponent;
Note: The naming of import is completely independent in default export and we can use any name we like.
Here's a great answer that explains default and named imports in ES6
I'm using react-komposer to wrap React components with a data fetching wrapper.
It is very basic and I'd want to wrap multiple components in Meteor. But I can't figure out what the export pattern is?
Here is what I have (and gives me an "Unexpected Token" error - probably obvious if you understand this well!):
// myContainer.jsx
import Component1 from './Component1.jsx';
import Component2 from './Component2.jsx';
function composer(props, onData) {
if (Meteor.subscribe('SingleTodoLists').ready()) {
const todoList = todoLists.find({}).fetch();
onData(null, { todoList });
}
}
export composeWithTracker(composer, Loading)(Component1);
export composeWithTracker(composer, Loading)(Component2);
And I'd like to import them like this:
import { Component1, Component2 } from './myContainer.jsx';
This wrapper syntax is not really clear for me, so I'm unsure about what to try. Playing with export default and other variations yielded no result so far.
If you don't use default exports, you need to name the things you export:
export const TrackedComponent1 = composeWithTracker(composer, Loading)(Component1);
export const TrackedComponent2 = composeWithTracker(composer, Loading)(Component2);
If you use default export instead you can omit the name, e.g.
export default composeWithTracker(composer, Loading)(Component1);
But you can only define one default export per module
See the documentation for the ES6 export syntax: https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/web/javascript/reference/statements/export
Update:
If you want to keep the original export names:
import _Component1 from './Component1.jsx';
import _Component2 from './Component2.jsx';
//... you code here
export composeWithTracker(composer, Loading)(_Component1);
export composeWithTracker(composer, Loading)(_Component2);
Because Component1.jsx uses a default exports, when you import it you can rename it as you want (e.g. _Component1, UntrackedComponent1, ...). Without a default export, you could have used import { Component1 } as _Component1 instead.