howprogrammingworks/function

Functions as a method to raise level of code abstraction

Functions, lambda-functions, function contexts, closures

function's Issues

Extend test cases with passing a named function

According to MDN (source):

If function name is omitted, it will be the variable name (implicit name).
If function name is present, it will be the function name (explicit name).

Code exmaple:

const foo = function () {};
foo.name // "foo"

const foo2 = foo;
foo2.name // "foo"

const bar = function baz() {};
bar.name // "baz"

I suggest extending test cases with the following case:

diff --git a/Exercises/4-methods.test b/Exercises/4-methods.test
index a408b22..78eb07d 100644
--- a/Exercises/4-methods.test
+++ b/Exercises/4-methods.test
@@ -10,11 +10,15 @@
         },
         m3(x, y, z) {
           return [x, y, z];
-        }
+        },
+        m4: function sum(x, y) {
+          return x + y;
+        },
       }, [
         ['m1', 1],
         ['m2', 2],
-        ['m3', 3]
+        ['m3', 3],
+        ['sum', 2],
       ]
     ],
   ]

Improvement suggestions for d-decompose.js

• change introspect function so that it can handle objects included
• change introspect function so that it can handle recursive objects
• parseLines improvement so that it can process more than one space b/w parameter name and data type
• add support for curried functions multiline structure
  e.g.

'use strict';

const currdObj = { 
	common: {
			sum:  (
			// Partial sum apply, use first argument
			x // first argument which should support summation opertaion
			// Example: sum(1)
			// Returns: function(y) { return 1 + y }
		) => (
			// Apply curreied sum to second argument
			y // second argument which should support summation operation
			// Example: sum(1)(2)
			// Returns: 3
		) => (
			x + y
		) 
	}
};

introspect(currdObj)