add commonjs export keyword

[AnEmortalKid]

Adds woof as a keyword for module.exports

[vpzomtrrfrt]

This change seems irrelevant?

[AnEmortalKid]

I noticed it's misspelled, I can revert it

[vpzomtrrfrt]

Is the potential ambiguity between this and exporting an equality comparison a concern?

[AnEmortalKid]

I battled with this internally. originally I was using the as keyword like we do for require: so blah as blah, but that sort of shifted everything around:

woof such f much b wow as bar

Can you export an === ? :

module.exports = === b;

I kept is since at least it feels consistent (though misleading) with very x is y. I guess it's not really needed for the woof statement. Would it feel too out of place to not have it?

woof bar such foo

vs

woof bar is such foo

[AnEmortalKid]

Or maybe I misunderstood :( care to elaborate? @vpzomtrrfrt

[vpzomtrrfrt]

I think I was referring to the possibility of module.exports = foo === bar

[AnEmortalKid]

Ah, I don't think so, since at that point keys[4] would be the === marker.

[AnEmortalKid]

We might have to make it a bit wonky:

woof as foo much a b
  shh 1
wow

Since wow is a terminating keyword it might be tricky to try to support

woof much a b
ahh 1
wow as foo

Particularly with the available tokens being provided on a line basis, we won’t have the export name until we process the wow

[AnEmortalKid]

We might have to make it a bit wonky:

woof as foo much a b
  shh 1
wow

Since wow is a terminating keyword it might be tricky to try to support

woof much a b
ahh 1
wow as foo

Particularly with the available tokens being provided on a line basis, we won’t have the export name until we process the wow

[vpzomtrrfrt]

Hmm, that's a good point

[AnEmortalKid]

What if we used so (feels odd but the woof keyword helps distinguish)

woof foo so much a b
  shh 1
wow

module.exports.foo = function(a,b,) { //1 }

[AnEmortalKid]

Well, other thanso I also thought of be

woof foo be much a b wow => module.exports.foo = function (a,b)

Can’t think of any other keywords atm :(

[AnEmortalKid]

@vpzomtrrfrt any outstanding issues with this?

[AnEmortalKid]

I'll push some changes with woof x be y as the syntax, so we can do woof x be foo is bar.

[AnEmortalKid]

Pushed changes with be. I made TODOs for the other expression supports. In a follow up PR i'm going to extract the main chunk of parse() into a parseKeys so all the handler functions i'm declaring outside can call that (to have more recursive power).

[AnEmortalKid]

@vpzomtrrfrt any opposition with the new keyword?

[vpzomtrrfrt]

be seems like the best compromise so far

[AnEmortalKid]

@vpzomtrrfrt ready for final blessing :)