I have no vested interest in Ramda/LoDash/Underscore, but this isn't the first time I've seen articles from the author of Ramda comparing it to LoDash and/or Underscore and it is always in this sort of, "see how Ramda" is better sort of way.
I'm all for simplicity and fully aware of YAGNI, however throwing that around when we are talking about APIs for public consumption vs a specialized application are two totally different beasts. He essentially claims negative stepping through a range is so uncommon that there is no need to support it directly.
Underscore's implementation isn't difficult to figure out and it's flexible. And in my opinion at least, _.range(3,0,-1); is easier to read and type than R.reverse(R.range(1, 4)); as well as being more versatile.
Unerscore is small, flexible, well documented and easy to understand. Additionally there is a good chance other JavaScript developers I encounter already know how to use it.
bigtunacan 3695 days ago. link 1 point ▲ ▼