@wycats might have an ideahttps://twitter.com/jacobrothstein/status/895758095640535040 …
-
-
To clarify, I'm also curious why Map and Set themselves didn't get .map, .reduce, .filter, etc, but got .forEach (which seems least useful)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jacobrothstein @jc00ke
I advocated for forEach as a transitional step when Maps had landed in browsers but not for/of.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Did the conversation in this thread just never get returned to? https://github.com/rwaldron/tc39-notes/blob/master/es6/2014-11/nov-19.md … Lack of fp-style interface to collections seems odd
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @jacobrothstein @jc00ke
I'm interested in pushing for flatMap to getting added to collections other than Array (an Array is proposed atm)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
flatMap on instances of Set/Map or their .entries()? What gets flattened? Personally would love reduce/filter/map on Set.proto & Map.proto
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jacobrothstein @jc00ke
Instances. Entries are just an Iterator (which could also have flatMap) but you want sets to flatten into sets.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Oh I see. I was definitely imagining the default return value of any collection function would be an Array. Hadn't considered Map -> Map
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
It's kinda like jQuery().children(), which wants to produce a new jQuery, not Array.
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.