ramda VS Hegel

JavaScript is great for point-free programming! Make sure you check out Ramda.js https://ramdajs.com/

It’s fun in the sense that solving a puzzle is fun, but I avoid it for anything I need to maintain long-term.

But it’s good practice for understanding combinators which is useful for some kinds of problems.

This is very cool. I remember I got sucked into things like Ramda going down this functional programming rabbit hole :-)

https://ramdajs.com/

To create our pipeline, I'm going to use the pipe function from the NodeJS ramda library instead of building my own.

Other libraries to check out are pratica and ramda

I recently took ownership of the new types/ramda repo. This repo is re-exported by @types/ramda and is the first step to bringing type definitions for ramda in-house. We're already hard at work correcting major issues, adding full currying support, and general bug fixes

I'm going to be honest. You probably don't need to use currying in JavaScript. In fact, trying to fit it in your code is going to do more harm than good, unless it's just for fun. Currying only becomes useful when you fully embrace functional programming, which, in JavaScript, means using a library like Ramda instead of the standard built-in functions.

Lodash gets so many things wrong I’d rather not see it in most projects. I appreciate a good utility library for JS projects but my go-to choice has to be Ramda[1]. Every function it exports is curried and works great with pipe which enables me to write highly reusable and composable functions in pointfree notation. I have never been as productive with lodash, and I find the functional style easier to read

[1] https://ramdajs.com/

Do note though that ramda is different from rambda. 👍 (Granted they are very similar!)

unfortunately, the project is on pause for the time being [1]

[1]: https://github.com/JSMonk/hegel/issues/355#issuecomment-1075...

Thank you. Just checked out the Bagel post (https://www.brandons.me/blog/the-bagel-language) and it looks really cool. Identifying pure functions (whether that is by syntax annotation or from synthesis) is a really good idea, gives me some ideas for doing function inlining in Ezno. I like the "Misc niceties" section, a few of those may of may not be on Ezno's todo list :)

The automatic / inferred generic restrictions is quite cool. https://hegel.js.org/ got there before me! Basic restriction modification is quite simple e.g. `(x) => Math.sin(x)`, x wants to be a number so can add that restriction. It gets more difficult with higher poly types. `(someObj) => Math.sin(someObj.prop1.prop2)` requires modifying not just `someObj` but a property on a property on it. And `(x, y) => printString(x + y)` requires doing even more complex things. But its definitely possible!

Can TypeScript be improved in this respect? Or, in broader terms, can a superset of JavaScript support a sound type system without becoming overly complicated?

An alternative to TypeScript can be Flow, a library maintained by Facebook. Flow, similarly to TypeScript, is not a sound type system. "Flow tries to be as sound and complete as possible. But because JavaScript was not designed around a type system, Flow sometimes has to make a tradeoff". Another alternative is Hegel, a type system that "attempts" to be sound. It is unclear to me if the attempt succeeded or not but it is worth checking.

Check out Hegel[0], it uses Flow syntax, it's compatible w/ .d.ts type definitions and has a smarter type inference model than both TS and Flow IMHO.

[0] https://hegel.js.org/