it's probably worth noting that if your argument is "the problem is that Tom Dale is a worse programmer than 1/
-
-
Dan Abramov", it's possible that many other people will find themselves as flummoxed as Tom. In other words, 2/
2 replies 0 retweets 12 likes -
if the KO argument for your programming model is that the creator came up with a clever answer to a challenge, 3/
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
lots of users are going to encounter the same challenge but not be
#winning like#MotherFuckingDanAbramov. 4/45 replies 0 retweets 17 likes -
I don’t think dividing functions into functions is very clever, but yes, it is required for using Redux successfully.
2 replies 2 retweets 36 likes -
Replying to @dan_abramov @tomdale
your argument was, more or less, that Tom should have remembered about .filter(). It's probably not that Tom 1/
3 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
wasn't *aware* of .filter(), but that he didn't think of it here. The fact that you remembered it isn't an answer. 2/2
6 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @wycats
is that different than not knowing some ember array mutation method?
@dan_abramov@tomdale2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
this is just old knowledge :) You can just write a getter that returns an array now.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats
knowing to "just write a getter" seems more advanced than freaking array.filter
@dan_abramov@tomdale1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes
WAT. You have to put the filter somewhere. In Ember you write array.filter. The end.
-
-
Replying to @wycats @ryanflorence and
but now you're trolling. your point wasn't about "advanced" but "you have to know some mutation method"
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.