Repository navigation
[Feature request] support from 'module' import xxx #31260
Description
Suggestion
support from 'module' import xxx
As the ES6 import Statements, the module is always at the end of the statements like this:
import {xxx} from 'module';If we can declare the module name at first, it will be better for typing and IntelliSense.
Just like this:
from 'module' import {xxx};After compile，the results are the same.
Could we support it like this in TypeScript?
Examples
before(TypeScript)
from 'module' import {xxx};after(JavaScript)
import {xxx} from 'module';Checklist
My suggestion meets these guidelines:
- This wouldn't be a breaking change in existing TypeScript/JavaScript code
- This wouldn't change the runtime behavior of existing JavaScript code
- This could be implemented without emitting different JS based on the types of the expressions
- This isn't a runtime feature (e.g. library functionality, non-ECMAScript syntax with JavaScript output, etc.)
- This feature would agree with the rest of TypeScript's Design Goals.
Activity
danvk commentedon May 5, 2019
New Future (@NewFuture) The TS team generally doesn't implement syntax that isn't standard ECMAScript.
Autocomplete of imports is really nice, though. I usually wind up writing:
and then go back inside the
{}to get autocomplete.NewFuture commentedon May 5, 2019
Dan Vanderkam (@danvk) yes, but
The second syntax will be much better for coding, just keep going forward with autocompletion.
I prefer ECMAScript to implement it😄
lll000111 commentedon May 6, 2019
My IDE (WebStorm) has "live templates with variables" that can be used to insert the whole import statement line all at once, but then place the cursor immediately inside the {} Examples (not mine, just found the link to be able to post an example): https://medium.com/@drapegnik/useful-javascript-react-live-templates-for-webstorm-8a6c70aee207 I'm sure there's a plugin for VScode somewhere out there too.
While I might agree (have not really thought about it because it's not a big deal) that maybe the order is not the best, I think using an IDE feature is a much better solution than trying to come up with non-standard syntax.
As it is, right now unless you use two or three special TS features (I think namespaces, enums, and export=/import=require()) you can just change the filename extension and apart from the type annotations, TS == ECMAscript. Please let's keep it that way. When I switched from Flow types to TS (not because TS is better - as far as types are concerned, it isn't - but because I prefer to stay in the mainstream regardless of which product is "better") all I did was rename the files *.js => *.ts and change a few types, not a single code change. That compatibility is a good thing™ That is why the Babel TypeScript plugin is possible: It only removes type annotations and that's it, transpilation of code and imports/exports is left to the usual Babel plugins.
Compatibility is much more important than some very tiny convenience (I myself never even noticed a need) that an IDE can already provide.
kitsonk commentedon May 6, 2019
Duplicate of #3127, #2370, #2371 (and possibly others)
This has been discussed and closed MANY times before.
NewFuture commentedon May 6, 2019
thanks Kitson Kelly (@kitsonk)