just VS proposal-iterator-helpers

just-diff

You can roll your own or use a utility library. A simple zero-dependency library would be something like just-group-by [1]. Although I now prefer remeda [2] as it seems to have the best typescript support, especially the strict variants such as `grouBy.strict`.

[1] https://github.com/angus-c/just#just-group-by

Tree-shaking doesn't help much when the tree-shaken implementation is so bloated.

Here's the one you referenced, lodash.chunk: https://unpkg.com/lodash.chunk – 140 lines after removing comments and whitespace.

That's pretty small compared to a lot of the lodash utilities. Try spot-checking a few on unpkg.

I prefer angus's `just` utilities: https://github.com/angus-c/just

I absolutely love this. When I need some Lodash alternative I'll usually reference angus-c/just but I am definitely bookmarking this for next time.

The just set of utility functions are really nice to use. https://github.com/angus-c/just

Just doesn't have everything but it's pretty good

One of my favourite "libraries" are the "just" packages, where each part of the library is it's own simple package with zero dependencies (https://github.com/angus-c/just) so you essentially just npm install the specific thing you want - which is generally a single function.

If the code should, as you say, be 5 lines, why take on a dependency at all? By doing so, you end up with a catch-all solution that does almost nothing other than JSON.stringify your args, which is extremely poorly optimized to handle many situations, e.g. one of your args is a primitive and the other is a large config object.

Global iterator type is coming: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-iterator-helpers

But a method named `groupBy` on iterators traditionally means a different thing: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-array-grouping/issues/51#is...

Global iterable type it's too late for, since there's many extant iterables in the language and on the web which don't have it in their prototype chain and can't reasonably be changed.

Very much agreed. The amount of mileage we get from using Spread (literally the ...) alone has been amazing. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe... Iteration helpers is shipping soon, that'll be a huge help (async iteration helpers will be delayed for a while). https://github.com/tc39/proposal-iterator-helpers .

In the olden days, I feel like the codebases I worked on needed to use .apply() multiple times a week, to figure out some creative way of invoking functions. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe... That's all gone now; I'd take even odds that 50% of my team knows .call and .apply.

Chrome 117 is shipping Object.groupBy() and that's gonna be a huge help in eliminating a lot of the last places we end up using lodash. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe...

Once this https://github.com/tc39/proposal-iterator-helpers reaches browsers, I'm prob gonna be exclusively using Maps.

No, probably not. But with iterator helpers, you can do

> focus more on improving the terrible JS web API

That's W3C’s job, not ECMA’s.

> Where are all the containers?

?

> Sorted sets/maps?

Sets and Maps are sorted (by insertion order)

> Why can't I even map an iterator?

It's coming, but someone will likely be exhausted by that addition. https://github.com/tc39/proposal-iterator-helpers

Upcoming: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-iterator-helpers

Not Generators, but Iterators have a Stage 3 proposal with helpers like these.

I guess you are not the only one dealing with this. That’s why there is this proposal https://github.com/tc39/proposal-iterator-helpers So hopefully it will get easier soon. But in most cases you can simply wrap it in Array.from or you can also clone with the spread operator.

Let's assume Number.range(), iterator helpers and some isPrime() function. From that we could easily create the following: