Kulish: Thanks for the reply btw

Trucchi: Dekok: personally I’m a fan of making util libs like that totally modular, but also offering the full package

Rossano: Alf0nn: it just puts a value in the promise, it doesn’t cancel the task that created that promise.

Trucchi: I have no interest in using lodash, but their approach to modularizing is exactly what I like

Mulkins: I use lodash. Should I be using something else?

Pacheo: And it also has cute drawings

Mulkins: Dekok: where’s your blog?

Hope: Mulkins: depends on what you want

Trucchi: I like fooModule, fooModule.method1, fooModule.method2, etc all as separate modules

Dursch: Mulkins: http://robotlolita.me/. The post on promises is a draft, I haven’t published it yet

Willey: Are there things to watch out when using setInterval?

Dopita: Mulkins: the draft: https://github.com/robotlolita/robotlolita.github.io/blob/master/_drafts/how-promises-work.md

Cockrill: I was thinking that if the other task isn’t done and the other gets executed, it will affect the browser

Dembinski: Alf0nn: no, promises just don’t have cancellation anywhere in the semantics. So if you reject a promise, the request won’t be aborted.

Trucchi: Mulkins: much of it is solid, but those of us who like to do a lot of currying, partial application, and/or function composition find that all the lodash methods are backwards – the target object should be on the end, rather than in front. so you can do things like var double = _.curry_.mapfunctionx { return x * 2; }; numsx2 = doublenums;

Swanner: Alf0nn: if you need that, you’d have to use a different data structure. Tasks have support for cancellation semantics and resource handling, but there’s less material on them and they’re less used than promises.

Strick: Alf0nn: you could also use the task queue thingie, which would make it very easy to add cancellation semantics, and concurrency limits in the future, if you need

Mulkins: Trucchi: should I be using something else?

Steltzer: Function a { console.logtrue; } var itvrl = setIntervala, 2000;

Wakley: Zumba_addict_: ReferenceError: setInterval is not defined

Trucchi: Mulkins: there are also schools of thought against “here’s your entire toolset” utility libs in favor of a more a la carte approach. However, if you want to try out a more FP-friendly ****ogue of lodash, I’d check out ramda

Biggins: Mulkins: Ramda is particularly popular with the functional approach.

Hadesty: My next thing on the todo was to switch all the calls to socket.io

Granier: Trucchi: just wrap the array

Beutel: To avoid headaches, but I will look into it

Mulkins: I’m using ES6 so I use lodash very minimally but I’ll check it out

Ideue: _array.map.filter.ect

Litrenta: And will read your blog from beginning to end

Apruzzese: Folks, I need a code that will take more than 2 seconds to complete

Neiling: People complaining about problems that don’t exists, sheesh

Trucchi: Higuchi: yeah I know – but it’s sometimes nice to be able to very quickly define reusable functions that you can then work on any object. That’s more annoying to do if the object is in front, that’s all

Zangari: Zumba_addict_: sleep3000;

Crockett: You can do it both ways

Moriwaki: Oh, I thought it was only in bash

Andree: You have more choince than with the native methods lol

Trucchi: Higuchi: I’m not bashing lodash, I’m just saying there are other libs that, IMO, work better – at least with my preferred code style nowadays

Vittetoe: I’m interested Trucchi because I use lodash

Cremonese: Also that form is much more consistent with functional languages like haskell, where the function name is first, then the iterator function, then the collection

Mahi: Well, its a little rearranged