Although it doesn't allow composition with generator functions like the composition proposal does, otherwise it's a pretty good solution.
My only concern with pipeline is that since it offers a different way of calling functions than the `()` syntax, it can lead to mixed and hence slightly more confusing code when both `()` and `|>` are used. For example multi arg and no-arg functions would still use `()`, and single arg functions may or may not use `|>` depending on whether or not they may prospectively use a pipeline. The composition operator doesn't supersede the `()` syntax in any context, and so it could be argued it would lead to more consistent, more readable code. On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 at 15:02 Peter Jaszkowiak <[email protected]> wrote: > I'd like to point out the partial application operator: > https://github.com/tc39/proposal-partial-application > > Sounds like the combination of pipeline + partial application would result > in what is essentially the same as function composition operator: > > ``` > const h = ? |> f |> g; > ``` > > Which results in `h` being the composition `g • f`. > > > On Feb 24, 2018 02:21, "Naveen Chawla" <[email protected]> wrote: > > That could be a problem for readability. > I agree with the rest of what you said. > > > On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 at 11:16 Viktor Kronvall <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I don’t know the implications but I could easily imagine the pipeline >> proposal being extended to not taking any input on the left hand side and >> effectively represent composition in the opposite direction. >> >> For example: >> ``` >> let h = |> f |> g >> h(2) //g(f(2)) >> ``` >> >> That said, the point holds for the proposal in its current state. Being >> able to compose functions >> leads to much more expressivity than if you have >> to call the pipeline (and collapse) where it is defined. >> 2018年2月24日(土) 14:32 Naveen Chawla <[email protected]>: >> >>> The function composition operator composes function pipelines into >>> functions for later use and/or further composition. Those functions still >>> need to be called via the existing `()` syntax, so it doesn't offer a >>> different way of calling functions as such. >>> >>> The function pipeline operator calls the function pipeline immediately, >>> so it is really only a different way of calling functions. >>> >>> On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 at 12:37 Jordan Harband <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> How is either operator not "a different way of calling functions"? >>>> >>>> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 8:34 PM, Naveen Chawla <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I was just thinking about the relative merits and coexistence (or not) >>>>> of function composition operator and function pipeline operator features: >>>>> >>>>> e.g. >>>>> >>>>> https://github.com/TheNavigateur/proposal-pipeline-operator-for-function-composition >>>>> https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pipeline-operator >>>>> >>>>> They can of course co-exist, but there is overlap only in the respect >>>>> that both allow function pipelines to be called from left to right (except >>>>> the input parameter in the case of the composition feature, which requires >>>>> existing bracket syntax to be used to call it). If one were to be chosen, >>>>> would say that a function composition operator adds a whole new dimension >>>>> of expressive power to the language, whereas a pipeline operator only >>>>> offers a different way of calling functions. >>>>> >>>>> I was wondering about all of your thoughts about whether you'd prefer >>>>> only the pipeline operator, only the composition operator, or both, or >>>>> neither to be added to the language (these are pretty much all the >>>>> possibilities), and why. >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> es-discuss mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>> es-discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >>> >> > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
