refactor(Style): replace default export with named #4064
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR is done in assumption, that only some files require all for exported Style types and for most of them only subset they use would be sufficient, and unused instances wouldn't be imported, reducing bundle size. It is indeed slightly smaller, from 608.07 KB to 607.53 KB based on
yarn analyze(parsed).I feel like maybe if this done at the scale it could reduce bundle more
significantly, but I'm interested in maintainers opinion about this, is it worth checking all default exports or do you prefer them over the named?What is the previous behavior before this PR?
export defaultwas usedWhat is the new behavior after this PR?
export constis used now