DEV Community

Discussion on: Lodash and Underscore, is there still a case?

Collapse
 
johnkazer profile image
John Kazer • Edited

If you make JS more fully functional, there would be little point in using it - just switch to Elm or ClojureScript (which compile to JS). Part of the reason for sticking with JS with a functional style now is that it offers more flexibility than Elm or ClojureScript. Writing your own functions or updating a library is much easier than issuing new versions of JS!

Collapse
 
adam_cyclones profile image
Adam Crockett 🌀

Who said anything about issuing new versions of a language? I just said wouldn't it be nice is all 😀

Collapse
 
ssimontis profile image
Scott Simontis

I would love to, but I have always worked in places which were entirely distrustful of technologies unless "everyone else was doing it." They asked for ideas to be innovative, but saw anything unknown or new as a risk. I could get away with using Lodash, so I did what I could without getting fired.

I don't know I would feel comfortable using Elm in a Production app yet. It's getting there and I love the language, but it's not quite there yet. I have been meaning to pick up Clojurescript. Tried Purescript and the outdated documentation was frustrating, plus the toolset was not desirable. I love ReasonML, but getting it to compile into Javascript seems like some arcane art. The deployment process, or what little I could find describing it, was a pain in the butt and Bucklescript was, at the time, holding the entire product back because it didn't work very well and was out of date.