导入语句中的销毁分配 [英] Destructuring assignment within import statements

问题描述

根据此来源和在某个地方的项目中看到过这种用法的模糊记忆，我很好奇是否有人能够执行以下操作:

According to this source and a vague memory of having seen this sort of usage in a project somewhere, I'm curious if anyone has been able to do the following:

import {map: { series }} from 'contra'

解构分配概述:

ES6中的import语句的行为类似于解构，但是它 重要的是要注意它实际上并没有破坏性.

The import statement in ES6 behaves similarly to destructuring, but it is important to note that it is not actually destructuring.

看来，导入的工作方式略有不同，也许不能指望相同的确切行为，但是我无法验证其状态.我要尝试做的是ECMAScript 6/7官方规范的一部分吗?

It appears that imports work a little different and perhaps one cannot expect the same exact behavior, but I haven't been able to verify the status of this. Is what I am trying to do part of the official ECMAScript 6/7 spec?

在尝试回答此问题时，请包括(或链接)规范中澄清此问题的部分.

In attempting to answer this, please kindly include (or link) the portion of the spec that clarifies this concern.

推荐答案

规范的相关部分为此处.

ImportDeclaration 是

import ImportClause FromClause ;

如果检查 ImportClause ，您会发现它只是熟悉的* as Foo或DefaultImport或{ImportSpecifier, ...}等，其中 ImportSpecifier 是一个 ImportBinding ，它又是一个 BindingIdentifer ，它只是一个普通的 Identifier .

If you examine ImportClause, you'll see it's just the familiar * as Foo, or DefaultImport, or {ImportSpecifier, ...}, etc., where ImportSpecifier is an ImportBinding, which in turn is a BindingIdentifer, which is just a plain old Identifier.

MDN条目介于误导和完全错误之间.它应该说过(现在确实说过):

The MDN entry is somewhere between misleading and completely wrong. It should have said (and now does say):

ES6中的import语句与销毁表面上相似，但实际上是完全不相关的.

The import statement in ES6 has a superficial resemblance to destructuring, but is actually completely unrelated.

这些天来，我在MDN中发现了越来越多的错误和误导性信息.应该与一粒盐一起服用.权威参考是规范.

I find more and more incorrect and misleading information in MDN these days. It should be taken with a grain of salt. The authoritative reference is the spec.

这篇关于导入语句中的销毁分配的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！