is `export default function l() {}` syntactically valid?

[icefapper]

Hello
judging from the spec, function declarations following an export default can not have names. At least I was unable to derive export default function l() {} from the relevant rules outlined in ES2015 and ES2017 specs.
I am also rather confused by the fact that Table 43 in ES2017 actually uses such construct.

is it a spec bug? or am I only missing something?

[loganfsmyth]

As mentioned on Babel's Slack, the [+Default] in the FunctionDeclaration rule is additional syntax for that specific case, but it does not replace the normal function declaration syntax with a name, which still applies when export default is in use.

[loganfsmyth]

As mentioned on Babel's Slack, the [+Default] in the FunctionDeclaration rule is additional syntax for that specific case, but it does not replace the normal function declaration syntax with a name, which still applies when export default is in use.

[icefapper]

looks like I've missed the fact that the + next to a rule means 'also', not 'only'

[icefapper]

looks like I've missed the fact that the + next to a rule means 'also', not 'only'