Accepted practice for an ES6 module imported just for side-effects?

Question

I like to keep my code modular, so I put this kind of code in a separate file (overrides/extra.js):

import Ember from \'ember\';

Ember.RSVP.con         


        

Answer 1

Yes this is accepted if your module doesn't need to export any data, but there's no need to export anything from a module if it's not required:

import Ember from 'ember';

Ember.RSVP.configure('onerror', function(error) {
    ....
});

app.js:

import './overrides/extra';

Answer 2

I usually export an initialization function:

• the calling code is more explicit
• the calling code is able to take action on success (or failure)

I don't know Ember and its initialization but here's how it could look like:

import Ember from 'ember';

export default function initialize(){
    return new Promise(function(ok, nok){
        try { // or any other kind of failure detection
            Ember.RSVP.configure('onerror', function(error) {
                ok();
            });
            ... you may do other initializations here
            ok();
        } catch (e) {
            nok(e);
        }
    });
}

In the calling code

import initEmber from './yourFile.js';

initEmber()
.then(function(){
    ... here you know Ember is ready
})
.catch(function(){
    ... damn it!
});

Note that if Ember initialization is synchronous and may not fail, @RGraham answer may suit you better.