Say I have these imports:
import clearLineReporter from '../modules/clear-line-reporter';
import karmaReporter from '../modules/karma-reporter';
import metaTestReporter from '../modules/meta-test-reporter';
import stdReporter from '../modules/std-reporter';
import tapJSONReporter from '../modules/tap-json-reporter';
import tapReporter from '../modules/tap-reporter';
import webSocketReporter from '../modules/websocket-reporter';
these must be referenced like I do above, in other words, I obviously can't do this:
const imports = {
stdReporter: import(...),
tapJSONReporter: import(...),
...
webSocketReporter: import(...)
}
Is there any way I can reference imported files through some form of reflection? Because it seems like I can't group them together to reference them somehow.
Instead of import syntax, I could use require(), but I am wondering if there is some way I can do some dynamic things with import statements, for example reference them all dynamically, such that if I add or remove an import, I don't have to change any other code.
There is a great answer to this question that I discovered by asking a different question, here:
exporting imports as a namespace with TypeScript
Create a file name grouped-modules.ts for example, where you want to simply list only the modules and export each one.
export {default as clearLineReporter} from '../modules/clear-line-reporter';
export {default as karmaReporter} from '../modules/karma-reporter';
export {default as metaTestReporter} from '../modules/meta-test-reporter';
...
export {default as stdReporter} from '../modules/std-reporter';
export {default as tapJSONReporter} from '../modules/tap-json-reporter';
Then in your module you can just do :
import * as mods from './grouped-modules'
export {mods}
It will export both types and values in a namespace called s. You can then import them using :
import {mods} from 'your-module'
const anObject: mods.clearLineReporter = ...;
This allows you to dynamically group your modules into one variable.
Is there any way I can reference imported files through some form of reflection?
Answer is dependent on environment, meant in questing, because import statement can be ES native modules implementation in browser, or babel-ed to require statements in node.js, or compile-time resolved bindings in webpack.
So, in each case there is solution to do something reflection. In node.js with babel-ed code import is just require wrapper, so any information is available there.
In browser with native ES modules, all requests to them can be served via ServiceWorker, so it can provide necessary information about fetched ES modules. Also in browser ES modules can be dynamically imported that way: https://matthewphillips.info/posts/loading-app-with-script-module
Most interesting part is webpack: compile-time resolve and semi-reflection can be achieved by externals resolver in functional style (https://webpack.js.org/configuration/externals/#function), and runtime by load module API (https://webpack.js.org/api/module-variables/#webpack_modules-webpack-specific- )
Related
In React when you wanna import components from other files we use:
import ComponentName from 'somePlace';
That works fine, but I wanna know if there is a way to import the content of a file instead of the exports. I wanna put all import statements for components in a single file (e.g. imports.js) and have a statement like:
import './import.js' to all documents;
so all my components are automatically imported everywhere.
Is there a way to do that?
Globally import modules? Not really, no. And neither should you need to.
A hacky "solution" would be assigning all imports to the global context (e.g. window in the browser) so it's accessible that way. That's possible, but definitely not recommended. It'll also prevent your bundler (most likely Webpack) from optimizing a lot of code.
Apart from the technical aspect, there are other reasons not to do so. If you specify the imports in each file, you know exactly what imports that file needs and under what variables it is imported as for that file.
If you still want to simplify importing the same components over and over again, you can have this setup:
imports.js
// For default exports
import ComponentA from 'wherever';
export { ComponentA };
// For regular exports
//import { ComponentB } from 'wherever';
export { ComponentB } from 'wherever';
// For whole modules
//import * as wherever from 'wherever';
export * as wherever from 'wherever';
someOtherFile.js
// Either import as a namespace
import * as Imports from './imports';
console.log([
Imports.ComponentA,
Imports.ComponentB,
Imports.wherever.someFieldFromTheWhereverModule,
]);
// Or partial import
import { ComponentA, ComponentB } from './imports';
I am running a react application. The code below does not work because of the following error message:
import = is not supported by #babel/plugin-transform-typescript
Please consider using import <moduleName> from '<moduleName>'; alongside Typescript's --allowSyntheticDefaultImports option.
apiTypes.d.ts
declare module ModuleA {
declare module ModuleB {
export interface ModuleABInterface {
}
}
}
token.ts
import ModuleABInterface = ModuleA.ModuleB.ModuleABInterface
let test: ModuleABInterface
What would be the correct solution to import from nested modules?
It's impossible to nest ES6 modules. TypeScript namespaces (that were originally called "modules") can be nested, but should be avoided. And yes, it's impossible to import from them - you can only import the namespace object itself, using normal ES6 import declarations (not the deprecated import = syntax), then access their properties.
For cases like this,
/ACollectionOfTinyComponent/index.js
import Container from './Container';
export {
Container,
};
So the index.js becomes a directory to include other small parts without having to write each Component Name out all the time.
So in this case, we can import a component in another component like following:
import {Container} from './ACollectionOfTinyComponent'
//then use Container in the code here
Is this a bad practice? Since if I have airbnb linter enable then I got error linting of
Prefer default export import/prefer-default-export
it asks me to add default but that will cause compile error
I found out that because I added only ONE import & export for the index.js. But if I add more than one its fine!
For example, if I do
import Container from './Container';
import Ezeewei from './Ezeewei';
export {
Container,
Ezeewei,
};
Note that I added one more import of Ezeewei.
Then the linting rule will pass!
it asks me to add default but that will cause compile error
You must be using the wrong syntax for exporting a default.
export { name1 as default, … };
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Statements/export#Syntax
import {Container} ... Is this a bad practice?
Yes. If you have a single entry point into a component (like a a class), you should export it as the default rather than a named export. The designers of the language gave default imports and exports a special syntax to promote it as the primary use case.
http://2ality.com/2014/09/es6-modules-final.html#default-exports-are-favored
import { Injectable } from '#angular/core';
import { Headers, Http, Response } from '#angular/http';
import { Observable } from '#rxjs/Observable';
import 'rxjs/Rx';
import 'rxjs/add/observable/throw';
#Component({});
export shellModule{}
This is a piece of code form my Angular app that I copied from somewhere (I have removed the definitions in the exported module. I am using it to make a service to call APIs.
In the imports in this particular file, why is it that Observable is imported separately even though the entire rxjshas been imported. If a particular module is being imported in its entirety, why is a particular object from it imported separately? I tried asking this question at the forum from where I took it, but there was no answer. I want to understand if this somehow helps with optimization of code.
In general:
In Typescript, the way modules are handled would require you to either load in the entire library with the import * as rx from 'rxjs/Rx', or a specific exported module within the library to use it, so the the compiler loads in the types.
Reducing your imports to only the specific modules you need sets up your app to use tree shaking from Angular's AOT compilation. This is not done by the typescript compiler, but by a tool called rollup. So, it can help with optimizing code later, but it doesn't automatically do so.
As far as compilation overhead, bringing in the whole library might slow down the compiler a bit... but this isn't a very strong point except for massively complex libraries.
I, personally, prefer importing in specific modules because it makes the calling code a little cleaner since I don't need to use that global name to get to the specific name. rx.Observable vs Observable. A good example of this is the lodash library (rxjs is a bit more complex...)
Honestly, importing entire libraries like the line you have there: import 'rxjs/Rx' doesn't make sense to me. You should only import specific exported modules. Try removing it, seeing what errors you get, and then using the * as rx syntax instead.
As far as rxjs goes - it is a little wonky when you want to import specific operators like this question does - so the way to get specific operators is with: import 'rxjs/add/observable/from' - but that also requires a tinkering with your webpack set up as outlined in the referenced question's answer.
Let's see what the rxjs/Rx module exports:
export { Subject, AnonymousSubject } from './Subject';
export { Observable } from './Observable';
export { Operator } from './Operator';
export { Observer } from './Observer';
export { Subscription } from './Subscription';
export { Subscriber } from './Subscriber';
export { AsyncSubject } from './AsyncSubject';
export { ReplaySubject } from './ReplaySubject';
export { BehaviorSubject } from './BehaviorSubject';
...
import './add/observable/bindCallback';
import './add/observable/bindNodeCallback';
import './add/observable/combineLatest';
...
So it exports RxJs classes and also imports operators from the add folder. So as you can see it loads everything in the library. It doesn't export any global object though. So you need to use named export like this:
import * as Rx from 'rxjs/Rx'
to be able to use an exported class:
Rx.Observable.of(12, 3);
This emulates what you would have if you loaded the library using the bundle - a global Rx object:
<script src="rxjs/bundles/Rx.js">
If you want to use Observable without Rx global object, you need to import it separately:
import { Observable } from '#rxjs/Observable';
Observable.of(1);
Importing both
import { Observable } from '#rxjs/Observable';
import 'rxjs/Rx';
is not a good practice, but may be used if you don't want to import every operator separately.
Also see How to correctly import operators from the rxjs package.
In learning more about ES6/2015 imports, I've come across a couple of cases where I'd like to change the namespace of the default member in the import scope.
Basically the equivalent of import {myMember as name} from 'my-module', but for the default member. I expected something like import defaultMember, {defaultMember as name} from 'my-module', but that seems not to work.
It seems like this should possible:
Mozilla Docs
It is also possible to use the default syntax with the ones seen above (namespace imports or named imports). In such cases, the default import will have to be declared first...
Perhaps not the actual answer, but a solution that I'm using.
For this example, I was using Node-Simple-Schema, and did not want to track imports of it as it is often used across the global scope on the project I'm working on.
The problem is that when import SimplSchema from "simpl-schema'; is used, then "SimpleSchema" as a convention is not available globally.
So I created a code file "SS2.js" and placed the following in it:
import SimpleSchema from 'simpl-schema';
var SS2 = SimpleSchema;
export {SS2};
Then in the working file, I do a subsequent "chained" import and with the following:
import {SS2} from './imports/SS2.js';
SimpleSchema = SS2;
This gives me the default module export convention "SimpleSchema" available globally once again.