3 ms·

That's kind of my point, though? Caring about "blind dogmatism", one way or another, is not required to be a highly effective software dev. For example with l

• whstl 4y ago
  You say "one way or another". What is the "another" way, and who's advocating it? This page is NOT an invitation to rebuild lodash on every single project. It is not a prescriptive website. It is teaching material. This page is here, for example, so that people who only know about Lodash can know how it's implemented. If they ever start working on a no-Lodash project, they might not need to import Lodash. This is not a call-to-arms to uninstall Lodash from all projects and replace with hundreds of functions. Why would it be?
  • Zetice 4y ago
    Then this page could be replaced by looking at lodash's source code. In fact this page is harmful as it does not represent, precisely, what lodash is actually doing and should not be used to understand lodash. Further, I'm not responding to the page itself, but the discussion here around the page. A lot of developers are using their emotions (e.g. disgust, fear) to navigate their professional role, and I'm suggesting that this need not be the case. You can set all of that aside and be a highly effective developer. You don't need to care about any of this, and I'm seeing a lot of devs here who think they have to care in order to be effective.
    • whstl 4y ago
      It couldn't be replaced by looking at Lodash's source code, because A LOT of the alternatives here are built into Javascript, and the Lodash code is significantly larger. Check flatten in this website: array.flat(); Versus Lodash: function baseFlatten(array, depth, predicate, isStrict, result) { predicate || (predicate = isFlattenable) result || (result = []) if (array == null) { return result } for (const value of array) { if (depth > 0 && predicate(value)) { if (depth > 1) { // Recursively flatten arrays (susceptible to call stack limits). baseFlatten(value, depth - 1, predicate, isStrict, result) } else { result.push(...value) } } else if (!isStrict) { result[result.length] = value } } return result } About your point: sure, nobody has to care about all of this. But I don't see why we should give people a hard time because they do on their free time.
      • Zetice 4y ago
        Exactly; lodash doesn't use `array.flat()`, so the site does not teach, "how it's implemented." And I'm not giving people a hard time, I'm saying you don't have to care about all of this to be good at your developer job. If this was an obvious point to you, great!
        • whstl 4y ago
          The point of this website is not to show how Lodash implements things. Why would it be? It says so in there: it is "a description of how one would go about doing the same thing in vanilla JavaScript".
          • Zetice 4y ago
            You're arguing with yourself now, as I just quoted you: > This page is here, for example, so that people who only know about Lodash can know how it's implemented.
            • whstl 4y ago
• boredtofears 4y ago
  It's not that hard to do a basic cost benefit analysis of adding a package before you throw it in your package manifest. It usually takes minutes, not hours (and certainly not days). Skipping this step doesn't gain you major efficiencies and definitely doesn't make you a better developer.
  • Zetice 4y ago
    If you're unsure why this must be said, you've never worked in a large corporate environment. People will spend weeks on decisions like this.
• watwut 4y ago
  However, going into such multi hour/day journey once in a while is very effective way to learn. And writing down that journey is also very effective in forcing you to really go through and really learn.