> The RawJS author was saying that he doesn't like es modules as a language feature [...] You seem to be talking about a separate issue (dependency injection).
Yes, that's why I said "I don't personally have a problem with ES Modules per se". Because I don't. But I dislike the abuse of the feature, and frameworks that force its use.
But you also quoted a criticism of ES Modules and explicitly said "I do agree". That's the part that threw me off. The commenter you were quoting (and agreeing with) wasn't talking about dependency injection. Earlier in the thread he said "I admittedly have a visceral hatred for ES modules", and this was him listing his grievances. Dependency injection and ES Modules are completely orthogonal.
I think your other comment where you admit that this is off topic was a more straightforward statement of your position, because you didn't quote (or purport to agree with) an unrelated argument [1].
> IMO the language is fine, and imports are fine too, but the way they're used in frameworks isn't the best.
Ok so I think we're talking about two different things. The RawJS author was saying that he doesn't like es modules as a language feature because he has to separately import each identifier from a package. I was pointing out that you don't have to import each identifier separately, you can simply use the 'import * as identifier from "package"' syntax (es module namespace imports).
You seem to be talking about a separate issue (dependency injection).