Spec: Would `!!import.meta ? 'module' : 'not'` be a reasonable ask?

[SMotaal]

I'm think we all must have considered this at some point, but cannot recall.

Q: Is there a safe way for code to test if it is module or not (ie not early/parse error)?

This code would target runtimes supporting import(…) globally, irrespective of semantics, and so my thinking was a clean nice-to-have here could be !!import.meta ? 'module' : 'not' which should not be too much to ask for… thoughts?

---

Possibly Related Discussions

• import.meta.main in import.meta.main node#49440

[ljharb]

If code wants to assert its parse goal, it can do export {} to force ESM or with ({}) {} to force Script.

You can also wrap either of those in Function and a try/catch to detect it.

[SMotaal]

You can also wrap either of those in Function and a try/catch to detect it.

This one is more on point, but I hit this issue in node:

// sometimesModule.js — {package: type: 'module'}
console.log(
  (function() {
    try {
      import.meta.url;
      return 'module';
    } catch (e) {
      return 'not';
    }
  })(),
);

> node sometimesModule.js

SyntaxError: Cannot use 'import.meta' outside a module
    at Module._compile (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:872:18)
    at Object.Module._extensions..js (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:947:10)
    at Module.load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:790:32)
    at Function.Module._load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:703:12)
    at Function.Module.runMain (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:999:10)
    at internal/main/run_main_module.js:17:11

> node --experimental-modules sometimesModule.js

(node:37127) ExperimentalWarning: The ESM module loader is experimental.
module

So what I was getting at is sometimesModule.js would be an entrypoint that could be portable everywhere and in case it is node, it will either require or import('module').createRequire(…).

If code wants to assert its parse goal, it can do export {} to force ESM or with ({}) {} to force Script.

And so, this is a separate topic, but thanks.

[ljharb]

(I crossed out that part of my comment since Function always evaluates as a sloppy Script)

Why would you want a file to be both Module and Script? Can you help me understand the use case?

[bmeck]

At the top level this differs between Script and Module.

// maybe "use strict" here if you wanna have a Strict Script
let isModule = this === void 0;
// ... rest of file ...

[bmeck]

@SMotaal are you still wanting to pursue adding import.meta to Script or is that enough?

[SMotaal]

Why would you want a file to be both Module and Script? Can you help me understand the use case?

@ljharb Not a good way for me to be able to reframe problems (ie can you humor me anyway please), but say this is a workshop for newcomers, where they use the sometimesModule.js to bootstrap.

I'm inclined to think that for someone less experienced, an intuitive expectation would be to know for certain that they are not in a module.

As @bmeck points out:

At the top level this differs between Script and Module.

And certainly, this is not as intuitive, but also worth being aware of. It still can get messy to explain for such audience, though

Because there are other ways for such a module to evaluate with this being undefined that can merely be due to a bug in a some loader on some platform:

const evaluate = (1, eval)(`
  function() {
    "use strict";
    return eval(arguments[0]);
  }
`);

It is fair imho to say that semantics of this being undefined and the code being evaluate itself is module or not are rough and hacky to relate to for at least a few folks.

Therefore: The argument I am trying to consider making is that semantically speaking, import.meta is an object in module, otherwise not — and that could just as well be undefined.

---

(I crossed out that part of my comment since Function always evaluates as a sloppy Script)

Yup, was mid way trying to clean up the code I did towards it and saw it as I replied… thanks though!

[ljharb]

It seems to me that newcomers should understand that the two parse goals are different, and which one they’re using, before writing a line of code - just like they’d need to understand which language they’re writing beforehand.

[SMotaal]

@ljharb I appreciate there being different views on this, and appreciate others appreciating that when it comes to whohow to go about improving opportunities for newcomers learning, it is fair to assume that there will be different schools of thought, all worth appreciating.

Fair?

[SMotaal]

@SMotaal are you still wanting to pursue adding import.meta to Script or is that enough?

@bmeck Yes please — sorry, was midway in posting :)

[SMotaal]

@ljharb if we just considered how this plays out if it was introduced, where do you see !!import.meta causing runtime ambiguities or concerns?

[devsnek]

@SMotaal showing people the differences is good, but there's no reason to actually rely on these checks in code. Maybe if you're doing some advanced bundling or something, although even then it's iffy.

Some web people wanted import.meta in scripts (as an object) and I'm more interested in pursuing that.