4 ms·
I'd consider 'flatten' a common, somewhat agreed upon term for that specific operation. Which is why I find this annoying, not a huge deal, but certainly annoyi
by tylerFowler 8y ago
I'd consider 'flatten' a common, somewhat agreed upon term for that specific operation. Which is why I find this annoying, not a huge deal, but certainly annoying. The perfectionist in me though is most annoyed that calling flatten 'flat' feels like calling reduce 'reduction', it's just not consistent with the other methods.
- nmeofthestate 8y agoIMO "flat" is a better name, because "flatten" suggests a modifying operation is being performed on the array. "flattened" might be another option.
- tylerFowler 8y agoWell looking at the form the other operations (map, reduce, filter, etc..) are they usually describe what is being done to the source as a way to describe the output. As opposed to just describing the outcome. That being said there are some weird ones like "some" or "every". Regardless though some other well known FP languages use flatten so it lowers the barrier to entry on the API for people familiar with them.
- vortico 8y agoBut after reading the article, you should agree with the decision, right? It was completely justified, and all options were explored.
- tylerFowler 8y agoPersonally I somewhat lean towards the side of breaking the library in question, which could be ok if enough warning is given. They mentioned being worried that not everyone would fix their unmaintained sites but I don't think unmaintained sites make a lot of long term promises anyway. Space Jams aside of course. So while I don't necessarily agree with the decision I completely understand it, their motivation is very noble. And again, it's not that big of a deal as a one off decision.