4 ms·
Would be nice to have some indication of the size of the replacement visible before I click, so we can scan down the page and get a sense of what is what. That
by jerf 4y ago
Would be nice to have some indication of the size of the replacement visible before I click, so we can scan down the page and get a sense of what is what.
That is, I'd love to see how many of the replacements look like
_.now() -> Date.now()
and how many of them are like
_.invert(object) ->
function invert(obj) {
const newObj = {};
for (const [key, value] of Object.entries(obj)) {
newObj[value] = key;
}
return newObj;
}
Also clicking through I see a lot of "when lodash was created this was necessary because X, but now we can Y". Kudos for including that. It is both informative and helps this not come off as an attack.
- andrewla 4y agoYes -- this seems like it would be significantly more useful if it divided between "vanilla Javascript now supports this or similar functionality natively" vs. "if you're getting rid of lodash and use these functions, then you'll have to write your own variant, along with tests".
- Kerrick 4y ago> Also clicking through I see a lot of "when lodash was created this was necessary because X, but now we can Y". Kudos for including that. It is both informative and helps this not come off as an attack. It reminds me of https://youmightnotneedjquery.com/ https://youmightnotneedjquery.com/ in a good way.
- dchest 4y agoHere's https://github.com/you-dont-need/You-Dont-Need-Lodash-Underscore https://github.com/you-dont-need/You-Dont-Need-Lodash-Unders...