Does `export default` Prevent Us From Using Named Parameters? - ecmascript-6

Question

export default {
fetchService({ url, reqBody }) {
console.log(url, reqBody);
}
};
import fetchService from "#/services/FetchService";
const results = fetchService({
url: "hello",
reqBody: "hello222"
});
TypeError: Object(...) is not a function
So, to be clear, I am exporting from 1 file and then importing into other files in the same app.
However, if I do this without export - that is, I just include the function() definition/expression in the same file each time manually, then it works as expected.
I also tried export function.
It will only work if I just have a 'normal' function() definition in the same file. So...what's the deal? Why can't I use this named parameters technique with export default? 😕
I expect it to work something like this:
function dest({url = "something", someting}) {
console.log(url, someting);
}
dest({someting: "good!"});
something good! Fiddle

Answer 1

TL;DR: use export default function fetchService(){} instead
Notice that TypeError: Object is not a function. That sounds to me like you're attempting to invoke an Object instead of a function, which means that the thing that you're attempting to import is an Object.
Given the export statement you have above, this error makes sense! Taking fetchService out of the equation entirely, what would you expect to be export-ed if you wrote export default {}? I would expect an empty Object to be export-ed, hence the error.
I also tried export function
Close! That would have given you a single export that could have been import-ed through destructuring syntax, e.g. import { fetchService } from '#/services/FetchService'.
You can use export default function instead to get the result that you're looking for, here, which would be import fetchService from '#/services/FetchService'