my thoughts are the opposite. javascript (similar to perl and php) already has a huge number of specialized builtin functions and methods accumulated over its 20+ year evolution that pretty much solves every practical problem encountered in frontend programming (and effectively backend as well). the problem is a failure to educate new programmers on how to use existing builtins to elegantly solve everyday problems, instead of having them ignorantly reinvent things on their own.
the mindset to writing javascript programs is more akin to writing perl programs, e.g. "how do i leverage builtins to implement the requested one-off UX feature using elegant perl-like one-liners", instead of "how do i create extra abstractions, classes, and modules to implement this one-off UX feature". My thoughts: big source of JavaScript criticism is its small standard library and community attempts to solve that issue - hundreds of small modules. Significant part of lodash should be present in standard library. My lodash selection - chunk, dropWhile, first, last, flatten, fromPairs, pull, without, takeWhile, zip, flatMap, keyBy, property, groupBy, partition, sample, shuffle, sortBy, ary, memoize, once, operators as functions, clamp, inRange, get, mapKeys, mapValues, pickBy, many strings operations, attempt, constant, flow, noop, range. On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 1:22 PM, T.J. Crowder <tj.crowder@farsightsoftware. com> wrote: > I'd find it helpful to have: > > 1. A general steer from TC39 as to whether the committee are committed > to a robust, feature-rich standard library, or a minimal one (with the > expectation of a rich ecosystem of libraries, presumably). > > 2. Guidelines of what to consider when proposing standard library features. > > The latter can come from the community; the former needs to come from TC39. > > We see a fair number of simple lib function proposals on the list, it > would be useful to have some guidelines for what's worth properly > proposing and what's likely to be a non-starter. > > Naveen Chawla's [recent suggestion][1] is a good case in point: A > standard lib function for taking an array (ideally, an iterable) and > creating an object with properties referencing the elements by one of > their property's values. (One could easily argue for a Set version as > well.) Ignoring the details of his suggestion, this is a simple > operation that I've needed in every codebase I've ever worked on. I > haven't proposed it (having considered doing so repeatedly) because my > perception had been that TC39 wants to keep the standard lib small. > But with the additions in 2015, 2016, and 2017, is that simply not the > case (anymore)? > > Apologies if either (1) or (2) already exist and I've overlooked them. > > -- T.J. Crowder > > [1]: https://esdiscuss.org/topic/array-prototype-toobjectbyproper > ty-element-element-property > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > es-discuss@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
