[kevindeasis]

I'll put this here just in case no one comments.

https://lodash.com/docs#forEach

http://underscorejs.org/#each

[johnhenry]

If I'm correct, you're showing this as a counter example to prove that the two have incompatible APIs and are thus LoDash can't be used ad a drop in replacement. However, Lodash does alias it's 'forEach' function with 'each', so this wouldn't be an issue?

[ksherlock]

underscore.each has an optional 3rd parameter (context). lodash.each does not. If you depend on that 3rd parameter, you will be in a world of pain if you drop-in lodash. In fact you'd be better off if there was no alias because you would catch the problem sooner and have to think about the API differences when fixing it.

[9point6]

To be fair, that context parameter has only just been removed as part of 4.0.0. Instead they recommend you change your code to be of the form:

    _.each(collection, _.bind(function, context))

Which actually seems a lot more correct than some arbitrary context parameter

[vkjv]

How is it arbitrary? It's part of the ES spec.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe...

I'm honestly curious why this is being removed?

[9point6]

Ah, I actually didn't realise this was the case, I've always used `.bind(this)` for this kind of thing.

[tdumitrescu]

Yeah, each and forEach are aliases in both lodash and underscore.