Expose the replacement function as a named export instead about figures

[sindresorhus]

Would there be some benefits to expose the replacement function as a named export instead of default export?

I don't know. Would there be? You're the one asking.

[sindresorhus]

Just to make sure, are you suggesting the following: moving the function to a named export called replaceSymbols(), and keep the default export, but only for the figures (not for that function)?

Correct.

Actually, I think we can just move to ESM. My big ESM is in a month, but we can start early. I have a lot of modules to go through. Since we're doing a breaking release anyway.

[sindresorhus]

Are there some PRs from your other repositories I could use as example? This would streamline both the implementation and the review.

sindresorhus/manage-wifi@89dfe25

sindresorhus/debounce-fn@e07dc3f

[ehmicky]

In my opinion, having a variable that is both a function and a "traditional" object might have some drawbacks:

• This can be confusing for some users.
• It can come with some surprise if the user is checking for the variable type (for example with is-plain-obj)
• This can lead to some unexpected behavior when copying the variable. For example {...var} would keep the object properties, but not the function, while var.bind() would do the opposite.
• This can complicate TypeScript types.

On the other side, some users find default exports simpler than named exports.

Overall, I think using a named export is more proper, but I was curious what your thoughts on this were?

[sindresorhus]

Even if we moved the replacement function to a named function, the rest should still stay a default export (I will move to ESM soon, so having both will not be a problem).

I don't feel strongly about this. Any suggestion on the name for the replacement function? replaceSymbols()?

[ehmicky]

replaceSymbols() sounds good 👍

Just to make sure, are you suggesting the following: moving the function to a named export called replaceSymbols(), and keep the default export, but only for the figures (not for that function)?

[ehmicky]

Sounds good.

Are there some PRs from your other repositories I could use as example? This would streamline both the implementation and the review.

[ehmicky]

This was released in https://github.com/sindresorhus/figures/releases/tag/v4.0.0.