|
|
|
|
|
|
by dmix
1055 days ago
|
|
|
Because I prefer the FP style, arg orders, name schemes, documentation, and Ramda is just generally very clean and simple. And you absolutely do not need to use currying when using Ramda. It's entirely optional (just pass 2 arguments...). I tried it a couple times using Currying with Ramda but it mostly makes confusing code so I never did. That was probably 7-8yrs ago and I still use the library daily. Idk what type of code bases you guys have worked on but I've never had anything close to a situation where it complicated my Codebase or had other devs who were confused by it. I can imagine someone abusing currying and getting fancy with 10 levels of functions wrapped in another function that gets passed around but honestly that is just bad programming. Simplicity and clarity is something that is necessary in all programming, FP is not unique, and this library doesn't push you one way or the other, unless you use it for absolutely everything. |
|
|
I think this would be my only argument against Ramda vs something like Lodash, at least in a project with other contributors. Like, I’ll never use the currying because it doesn’t appeal to me. But if another engineer does, and uses it extensively, then we have a situation of “because it was easily available, someone did something that makes the rest of us have to stop and pick apart during review/debugging/whatever”.