This will depend on the size impact - I've updated the repo to include a size check, we'll see what it nets.

Ah - it looks like this adds a named export to the actual unfetch package, which means it won't work - folks using CommonJS will have to doimport('unfetch').default which is a breaking change.

Instead, if we could retrofit your work here into proper support for theResponse interface, that would definitely be a justifiable export! It would be a nice step towards supportingHeaders,Request andResponse, something that's been on my todo list for ages.

@kalisjoshua that'll be the added export. One quick solution to check this would be to move theresponse function into a separate file (src/lib/response.mjs) that is imported bysrc/index.mjs and tests, that way it's not exported asunfetch.response.

This is done now.

@kalisjoshua that'll be the added export. One quick solution to check this would be to move theresponse function into a separate file (src/lib/response.mjs) that is imported bysrc/index.mjs and tests, that way it's not exported asunfetch.response.

I will look into theResponse interface compatibility.

Interesting that the numbers are still so increased. My guess is that's because we're ending up with a closure around the two top-level functions, whereas currently there is no closure required since all functionality exists within the singleunfetch(){} function (as a sort of wrapper + implementation). Perhaps that's just something that we'll be giving up.

It's interesting to look at the compiled output diff ofdist/unfetch.js between the master branch and my branch. On the master branch thefor loop is expanded a little but on my branch the loop is most of the body of the function. I'm still examining it to see if there is anything that can be done to bring the output sizes closer because there isn't an extra closure.

I think the biggest contributor to the bloat that I created is because of the lifting of theresponse function out of the scope necessitating that arguments be passed in and that also results in a more complicatedclone attribute on the response object. I am able to slim the output size a slight bit; encapsulated in the most recent commit.