0.16 docs published
I think one hurdle of this project is the great ideas of this project go into it faster than we can write docs or even collectively grok what we're doing. e.g. #1205
I mean, there's jsdocs but honestly a lot of the functions deserve a lesson/blog/etc to explain them
@jethrolarson: Lenses I can explain. Transducers are another story (though there are at least three people in the Ramda community we know them well).
I totally agree that these things deserve a different form of documentation.
I’d like to have high-level documentation in addition to the API documentation. Topics to cover: currying (and how Ramda’s currying differs from “proper” currying); function composition (and how Ramda’s function composition differs from “proper” function composition); transducers; lenses; Fantasy Land.
That's why I say "collectively".
I don't really mean it as a gripe, but it's interesting how academically dense this space is.
While at the same time there's clearly a goal of making this library approachable
Your point is well taken. I’ll take responsibility for writing a section on lenses.
i look forward to reading it
@CrossEye already wrote a pretty good article on currying, ramda-style: http://fr.umio.us/favoring-curry
and composition, ramda-style: http://fr.umio.us/why-ramda/
Yes, these are great. Do you think it would be helpful to provide abbreviated versions in the documentation itself?
I think those were more argumentative than I would like for this style documentation, though.
Yes, abbreviated version, and a Just-the-fact-ma'am style.
And that's great. I thought there was an open issue to change the way that compose worked.
i covered (briefly) functors, apply, and applicative, and cats: http://buzzdecafe.github.io/code/2014/10/26/functors-and-applicatives/
We've done some of that for
compose, but I think there is still more to do.
Need to re-read the cats one now that I better understand this stuff.
funny to see how much the implementation has changed
Since you're both on, are you happy with ramda in general? Do you think its core is still the right foci for how you want to write?
I'm always mixed about changes that don't match any prior vision I've had. But I almost always come around, and I'm quite happy with the library as it's developed. I'm also extremely impressed with the extremely smart community that's grown up around it.