proposal-pipeline-operator VS You-Dont-Need-Lodash-Underscore

Current Status: You'd have to check the TC39 proposals repository or the official proposal text for the most recent status. As of my last update, it had not yet reached Stage 4 (final stage) of the TC39 process, which means it wasn't part of the ECMAScript specification yet.

Javascript may get it https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pipeline-operator https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ

It can be further simplified. For example, you don't need two separate functions to extract the first chat completion message etc.

This version:

- uses existing language constructs

- can be immediately understood even by the most junior devs

- is likely to be 1000 times faster

- does not rely on an external dependency that currently has 143 issues and every two weeks releases a new version adding dozens of new methods to things

Note: one thing I do wish Javascript adopted is pipes: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pipeline-operator

Still in stage 2 atm https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pipeline-operator

Both are active tc39 proposals :)

https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pipeline-operator - Stage 2

https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pattern-matching - Stage 1

Hopefully we get both in the next couple of years.

Some time ago I saw how hyped JS community was about pipeline operator proposal. So I tried to make something similar in python. There is how tipe module was created. Check it out if you are interested: https://github.com/mishankov/tipe

We often add promising TC39 proposals into Civet so people can experiment without waiting.

We've added https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pipeline-operator, a variant of https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pattern-matching, a variant of https://github.com/tc39/proposal-string-dedent and others.

Since our goal is to be 99% compatible with ES we'll need to accommodate any proposals that become standard and pick up anything TC39 leaves on the table (rest parameters in any position, etc.)

The Proposal is for the Hack pipe, so your example would be

These are all really outdated tips. Moment is deprecated and it is recommended to use dayJs or date-fns. Lodash is discouraged because it has a huge bundle size and nowadays you will find native functions which do most of the things people have used lodash before. https://github.com/you-dont-need/You-Dont-Need-Lodash-Underscore

https://github.com/you-dont-need/You-Dont-Need-Lodash-Unders... seems to be a more readable alternative to this website.

Adjacently useful is https://github.com/you-dont-need/You-Dont-Need-Lodash-Underscore

I never used lodash but I found this. Might interest you.

In one of my team's Pull Requests I noticed date-fns being added as dependency for our components library for one usage: transform a timestamp to "MM/yy" string, as it represented a debit card's expiration date. Inspired by You don't (may not) need lodash/underscore, I thought to myself - can't we just implement a 2-digit month and 2-digit year formatting? It looks simple, right?

Yes and no. We did but are converting to in-house code since most Lodash functions are already available as native JS and/or @babel/preset-env + core-js@latest (see: You don't need Lodash).