You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This does not work because the existence of the variable Object shadows the standard variable Object which the import code expects to be able to access, but because the definition is later in the file its value is not available at the time the import code needs it. As Object is not exported from this module, renaming it to something else would be a suitable workaround for this issue.
While it does seem the problem is essentially webpacks, it doesn't seem they're making much progresss on solving a potentially difficult issue, whereas it would be trivial to work around it here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We've decided to stop publishing rxjs-es for now per #2019 because it's caused more problems than it solved. We'll continue considering similar solutions for the future!
RxJS version: 5.0.0 beta 12
Code to reproduce:
In a project using webpack and babel to translate ES6 to traditional javascript:
import Rx from 'rxjs-es';
to the main source file of the projectExpected behavior:
rxjs-es is transpiled down to standard javascript and can be used in the project
Actual behavior:
The transpiled code contains the following chunk of invalid javascript that causes a runtime error during initialisation:
This does not work because the existence of the variable
Object
shadows the standard variableObject
which the import code expects to be able to access, but because the definition is later in the file its value is not available at the time the import code needs it. AsObject
is not exported from this module, renaming it to something else would be a suitable workaround for this issue.Additional information:
See also this bug filed against webpack: webpack/webpack#2618
While it does seem the problem is essentially webpacks, it doesn't seem they're making much progresss on solving a potentially difficult issue, whereas it would be trivial to work around it here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: