deprecate _(…).chain, _.isFinite, _.NaN, _.isNull, _.isUndefined, _.result, and _.size

[lodash]

deprecate _(…).chain, _.isFinite, _.NaN, _.isNull, _.isUndefined, _.result, and _.size

[machineghost]

Sounds neat. jashkenas has a very clear vision of what he wants (and more importantly, does not want) in Underscore, and it ... errs on the side of protecting the library over improving it. However, he's done an incredible job at creating/maintaining the quality of the library so far, so making an entirely new framework would definitely be a baby/bathwater mistake.

A "lodash" extension to Underscore could give users like us the benefit of a library that improves more rapidly, while leveraging all of the awesomeness of core Underscore. Good luck to you in making this happen :-)

[jdalton]

@machineghost

However, he's done an incredible job at creating/maintaining the quality of the library so far, so making an entirely new framework would definitely be a baby/bathwater mistake.

I disagree. You should check the latest Lo-Dash screencast: Lo-Dash’s origin and why it’s a better utility belt.

A "lodash" extension to Underscore could give users like us the benefit of a library that improves more rapidly, while leveraging all of the awesomeness of core Underscore. Good luck to you in making this happen :-)

This would not be an extension, but rather a build that keeps API compatibility intact.

[jdalton]

It's been 14 days so I will assume any comment on this should have already been made.

[superbob]

Concerning _.result :
Even if it's not used by backbone.js (but still used by some of its plugins e.g: backbone paginator), do you have some advice on what to use instead ?

[jdalton]

@superbob when the time comes for major breaking API changes I will either have those take place in another build, lodash next, to build a lodash.next.js and have the default remain Underscore compatible (so still having _.result) or I will expand lodash underscore to make a build that includes _.result. There will be a build that remains compatibile with Underscore's API so that can be used for projects that still depend on that API.

[superbob]

Thanks for the reply @jdalton, when you speak of 'major breaking API changes' do you mean in Underscore or from Underscore ? :) Do you think of merging your work in Underscore (thus improving it and specifically its perfs) or continue to fork ?
Just curious :)

[jdalton]

@superbob

when you speak of 'major breaking API changes' do you mean in Underscore or from Underscore ?

I mean, from Underscore. I've listed some changes I would like to make in the roadmap.

Do you think of merging your work in Underscore (thus improving it and specifically its perfs) or continue to fork ?

Lo-Dash started as a reverted pull request from Underscore. I'm no longer interested in contributing directly to Underscore.

[lock]

This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.