Add esm support

[TrySound]

Here's the difference between bundled with webpack console.log(hoistNonReactStatics)

hoist-non-react-statics.cjs.js: 4155
hoist-non-react-statics.esm.js: 4107

React-apollo is solved the problem with rollup interop.
https://unpkg.com/[email protected]/react-apollo.cjs.js

Though to prevent similar headaches with projects written in commonjs
I recommend to bump major release.

/cc @Andarist @eps1lon

[Andarist]

I would also recommend using exports: 'named' in rollup because of the webpack/webpack#7973 , and that would definitely require a major bump.

[TrySound]

FYI exports.default = hoistNonReactStatics increases bundled commonjs version to 4204

[Andarist]

Those have to be raw measurements right? I always compare gzipped - seems more relevant

[TrySound]

Yeah, I'm trying to take more attention on parsing size.

Do you think it's a good idea to enable exports: named for umd bundle? Sure it's more consistent but not very usable.

[Andarist]

Do you think it's a good idea to enable exports: named for umd bundle? Sure it's more consistent but not very usable.

Nowadays - yes, consistency is imho more important than "cuteness". One can always assign .default to their own variable.

[TrySound]

This is why I prefer named exports.

// here we need to always provide alias for "default"; for commonjs we don't have nice syntax
const { default: hoistNonReactStatics } = require('hoist-non-react-statics');
import { default as hoistNonReactStatics } from 'hoist-non-react-statics';
// vs; much easier to provide name out of the box
const { hoistNonReactStatics } = require('hoist-non-react-statics');
import { hoistNonReactStatics } from 'hoist-non-react-statics';

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 88.591% when pulling b1e3195 on TrySound:esm into 3b368d8 on mridgway:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 88.591% when pulling b1e3195 on TrySound:esm into 3b368d8 on mridgway:master.

[NMinhNguyen]

Would it make more sense to introduce a breaking change to switch to named exports entirely? Although I guess doing it this way means only CJS users need to update their requires, and ESM codebases are unaffected.

[eps1lon]

Would it make more sense to introduce a breaking change to switch to named exports entirely?

The last major release caused so many issues that I'd rather avoid this. HOCs are still used and as soon as react would introduce new statics then any hoc using an older version of hoist-non-react-statics would break.