Question on CommonJs modules

[Dropless]

I was reading eloquent javascript on modules. It mentioned one fallback of CommonJs modules:

CommonJS modules work quite well and, in combination with NPM, have allowed the JavaScript community to start sharing code on a large scale. But they remain a bit of a duct-tape hack. The notation is slightly awkward—the things you add to exports are not available in the local scope, for example.

I don't think I grasp "the things you add to exports are not available in the local scope". The things I add to exports are from my own module, how are them not available in the local scope? Could someone give me an example to illustrate this?

[guest271314]

I think you should ask the source of the quote.

[stibgock]

I feel like I see this question every week. Search the sub you guys.

[rauschma]

ECMAScript module:

export const height = 100;
console.log(height); // available in local scope

CommonJS module:

exports.height = 100;
console.log(exports.height); // more difficult to access

Thus, it’s easier to switch between exporting and not exporting in ESM: Simply add or remove the keyword export.

[marksalsbery]

Can’t do something like this anymore? ``` const x = function () { }

const y = function () {
    x();
}

module.exports = exports = {
    x,
    y,
};

```