These are chat archives for ramda/ramda

14th
Jul 2015
Michael Hurley
@buzzdecafe
Jul 14 2015 20:48 UTC
0.16 docs published
Jethro Larson
@jethrolarson
Jul 14 2015 23:12 UTC
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
David Chambers
@davidchambers
Jul 14 2015 23:14 UTC
@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.
Jethro Larson
@jethrolarson
Jul 14 2015 23:22 UTC
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
David Chambers
@davidchambers
Jul 14 2015 23:33 UTC
Your point is well taken. I’ll take responsibility for writing a section on lenses.
Michael Hurley
@buzzdecafe
Jul 14 2015 23:36 UTC
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/
David Chambers
@davidchambers
Jul 14 2015 23:38 UTC
Yes, these are great. Do you think it would be helpful to provide abbreviated versions in the documentation itself?
Scott Sauyet
@CrossEye
Jul 14 2015 23:38 UTC
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.
Jethro Larson
@jethrolarson
Jul 14 2015 23:39 UTC
And that's great. I thought there was an open issue to change the way that compose worked.
Michael Hurley
@buzzdecafe
Jul 14 2015 23:39 UTC
i covered (briefly) functors, apply, and applicative, and cats: http://buzzdecafe.github.io/code/2014/10/26/functors-and-applicatives/
Scott Sauyet
@CrossEye
Jul 14 2015 23:39 UTC
We've done some of that for compose, but I think there is still more to do.
Jethro Larson
@jethrolarson
Jul 14 2015 23:41 UTC
Need to re-read the cats one now that I better understand this stuff.
Michael Hurley
@buzzdecafe
Jul 14 2015 23:41 UTC
funny to see how much the implementation has changed
Jethro Larson
@jethrolarson
Jul 14 2015 23:43 UTC
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?
Scott Sauyet
@CrossEye
Jul 14 2015 23:57 UTC
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.