We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Why not use the same name for filtering as the native ecmascript 5 method?
Another reason is that it's particularly confusing for .net developers since in .net the map method is called select.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.linq.enumerable.select.aspx
If you'd like to keep this rubyism, maybe it would be worth doing what underscore does and make it an alias for filter?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
filter is a shitty name IMO it's ambiguous, but we could alias
Sorry, something went wrong.
You decide, I'd say that select is pretty ambiguous too, since it could be interpreted as 'pluck'. "From each item, I'd like to select this property".
I suppose, select > filter for me but it doesn't hurt to alias
Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.
Why not use the same name for filtering as the native ecmascript 5 method?
Another reason is that it's particularly confusing for .net developers since in .net the map method is called select.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.linq.enumerable.select.aspx
If you'd like to keep this rubyism, maybe it would be worth doing what underscore does and make it an alias for filter?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: