Usually the functions I.

Elvis: It wouldnt, it would just move the complexity around

Marstaller: Tcsc: yes, but from a readability/understandability perspective, it’s best how it is, I think

Elvis: I dont think splitting it up would help.

Matsuhara: Does anyone know how to somehow trace the dependency tree such that I can do a on any files referenced by a main file?

Dilthey: I.e. if server.js happens to refer to ././blah/thing.js, then I would want to run a gulp task when thing.js changes

Marstaller: I think it’s complaining about so many if statements, because I use 4 if statements in another function and I get a complexity score of 13. Are there any alternative approaches to them?

Elvis: Marstaller: i seriously wouldnt worry about this. that sounds like not a very useful way to think about code

Marstaller: Tcsc: yes, I see what you mean. I was just thinking of it in case it gives me a new perspective on how I’m writing code with a view to improving it

Elvis: It seems like its a way of letting a computer guess how complex a piece of code is

Marstaller: Tcsc: thanks for your advice

Marstaller: Is there any information out there to advice which loop to use in different situations?

Spigutz: Marstaller: In general you should always use .map, .reduce or .forEach

Malm: Like my spelling abilities

Marstaller: What’s wrong with for i=0, ilen=errors.length; iilen; i++{. ?

Defusco: Tcsc: right, so you p*** in the entity object as ‘this’ which is ‘e’ in the contect of the function ‘collisionGrid.forEachEntityAround’, however, the function that’s p***ed in is within a different object so the value of ‘this’ changes, and as it’s not defined? within world.grid.forEachEntityAroundthis, functione it takes on the value of the global this, which is “window”

Budak: Ironically in #go-nuts people will tell you to just use for loops

Aburto: Marstaller: Its implementation specific

Goodhue: Marstaller: Its neater to use the array extension functions

Vallas: Marstaller: But you know, in practice you can do the same thing with eaier

Pouncy: For i=0, ilen=errors.length; iilen; i++{ const error = errorsi; .dostuff. }; vs errors.forEacherror = .dostuff.

Elvis: Inside CollisionGrid.prototype.forEachEntityAround the this value is the collision grid

Elvis: And then when we call the function p***ed in

Elvis: E.g. not as a method, and not with .call or .apply

Defusco: Yeah – but the function that’s p***ed isn’t within CollisionGrid.prototype.forEachEntityAround , so it isn’t the collision grid within that function.

Defusco: I think that makes sense, I’ve not learned enough for it not to ha

Defusco: If that makes sense , as in, I’m not really familiar with some strict OOP that might make that too counter intuitive

Terzian: Torkable: Sorry, I missed your comment from before. What’s wrong with forEach?

Elvis: Yeah this’s behavior isnt that weird

Parkers: Its just sorta useless

Dorrough: There is pretty much always a better abstraction

Elvis: I usually use for loops over foreach

Burbach: Torkable: Its useful for side-effects stuff, if you have to do that

Gerwig: I havn’t used a for loop or a forEach in close to a year

Alice: Torkable: What if you need to update some DOM elements based on an array or something like that?

Kalinoski: Meh, forEach is fine in my book

Suriel: Torkable: map is to transform the list into a new list, but some operations are just side effects

Royal: You *should* use forEach for side-effects, and map for transformations

Cherico: Map is for executing a function for each element in a list

Kalinoski: For loops are even better for mutation though

Kalinoski: If you wanna do the dirty work

Gunther: Usually the functions I work with return a promise