Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

rename R.repeatN and revert argument order#629

Merged
CrossEye merged 1 commit intoramda:masterfrom
davidchambers:repeat
Dec 4, 2014
Merged

rename R.repeatN and revert argument order#629
CrossEye merged 1 commit intoramda:masterfrom
davidchambers:repeat

Conversation

@davidchambers
Copy link
Member

As discussed in #626

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would like to make each of the extensions its own repository with its own npm package. Ideally these would not be Ramda extensions specifically but small, focused JavaScript packages which work well with Ramda but do not depend on it.

For now, we can avoid the naming collision by treating R.lazylist as a namespace.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

i think that makes sense; they can all live under ramda/ group

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

they can all live under ramda/ group

They can indeed. This'll imply that they're compatible with, and philosophically consistent with, Ramda itself, while promoting them to first-class citizens with their own issue trackers, release cycles, and top-level namespaces.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

although i think it makes sense to have a ramda/fantasy repo for the algebraic types, rather than each type in its own

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sounds good to me!

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wonderful! I'm very pleased we agree on this. :)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Only trouble I see is that we wanted the ability to make custom builds that included some of these extensions as desired. Not sharing a code-base will make this trickier, no?

We needn't conflate the two. If a user wants to use a custom Ramda build such as --category list along with ramda/lazylist, she is of course free to do so. There's no reason to combine these into a single file. That's best left to a dedicated build tool, as one will no doubt want to bundle one's application files as well.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm just having a hard time giving up on what has been a major goal for me in the modularization all along. I know that Mike was worried about bloat and being able to create smaller packages as needed. I was going in the other direction, thinking about how to include those Ramda-parts you wanted in a single simple Ramda file.

That has also, of course, added complexity to the modularization code, and made it much uglier. But it's still hard to consider dropping.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

One benefit of separating the extensions is that it would make it possible to use ramda/lazylist, for example, without ramda/ramda. This is in line with the goal of producing JavaScript files containing only what's necessary.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Although that may be useful, since I've always thought of these as optional extensions that would be included in certain builds as part of Ramda, that's not much of a pull for me.

@buzzdecafe
Copy link
Member

thread on a tangent! imagine that. this is good to merge IMO

@davidchambers
Copy link
Member Author

I'll let Scott do the honours on this one.

@davidchambers
Copy link
Member Author

/ping @CrossEye

CrossEye added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 4, 2014
rename R.repeatN and revert argument order
@CrossEye CrossEye merged commit 86580c8 into ramda:master Dec 4, 2014
@davidchambers davidchambers deleted the repeat branch December 4, 2014 02:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants