Not quite as interesting to see an _ clone after watching this critique of _ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3svKOdZijA
Underscore.go
11–20 of 62 posts
Re: Underscore.go
#12Using the function as the first argument and the iterable as the second, makes it easy to curry functions. A port of Ramda (https://github.com/CrossEye/ramda) would be better for this reason.
Re: Underscore.go
#13Underscore was chosen in JS presumably because it is a valid variable name that isn't used for anything. Underscore in Go actually means something, which is why this is actually double -underscore, which makes it even visually more confusing. The approach is interesting, but I'd really rather see a better name.
It's Python all over again.
Re: Underscore.go
#14-1 on double underscore. Very off-putting.
Re: Underscore.go
#15Underscore was chosen in JS presumably because it is a valid variable name that isn't used for anything. Underscore in Go actually means something, which is why this is actually double -underscore, which makes it even visually more confusing. The approach is interesting, but I'd really rather see a better name.
Module systems really ought to allow renaming on import. (Such as: rename individual functions, add a prefix to all of the functions, or even do a regexp style replace of all existing prefixes if any.)
But unfortunately, from a quick glance it looks like Go's doesn't, is that correct?
Re: Underscore.go
#16Underscore was chosen in JS presumably because it is a valid variable name that isn't used for anything. Underscore in Go actually means something, which is why this is actually double -underscore, which makes it even visually more confusing. The approach is interesting, but I'd really rather see a better name.
Module systems really ought to allow renaming on import. (Such as: rename individual functions, add a prefix to all of the functions, or even do a regexp style replace of all existing prefixes if any.) But unfortunately, from a quick glance it looks like Go's doesn't, is that correct?
It does. See http://golang.org/ref/spec#Import_declarations
Re: Underscore.go
#17Underscore was chosen in JS presumably because it is a valid variable name that isn't used for anything. Underscore in Go actually means something, which is why this is actually double -underscore, which makes it even visually more confusing. The approach is interesting, but I'd really rather see a better name.
Module systems really ought to allow renaming on import. (Such as: rename individual functions, add a prefix to all of the functions, or even do a regexp style replace of all existing prefixes if any.) But unfortunately, from a quick glance it looks like Go's doesn't, is that correct?
You can rename the package on import http://play.golang.org/p/V01jD_EZyX
Re: Underscore.go
#18Ew, now you can have an awkward weak implementation of some FP ideas in Go too.
Yeah, I'm a bitch.
Re: Underscore.go
#19Underscore is not a perfect fit for JS, but it's close enough; if you like coding in the style Underscore promotes, Underscore.js makes Javscript programming simpler.
Underscore seems like it would not at all be a good fit for Golang. Golang really wants you to just use a for-loop.
Re: Underscore.go
#20Ew, now you can have an awkward weak implementation of some FP ideas in Go too. Yeah, I'm a bitch.
yo dawg, i heard you like FP...