Closed davidchambers closed 5 years ago
The code looks good.
I think I may prefer lookup
over value
, but not strongly. value
just seems really ambiguous. We are in a little pickle because our current names aren't consistent:
get - verb: would suggest lookup as the closest analogue
prop - noun: would suggest value as the closest analogue
Thank you for your feedback, @Bradcomp. :)
I think I may prefer
lookup
overvalue
, but not strongly.value
just seems really ambiguous.
Does seeing the types of value
and values
together change your perspective?
value :: String -> StrMap a -> Maybe a
values :: StrMap a -> Array a
I see this function as the singular of S.values
, so value
seems natural to me. I agree that value
is not descriptive, but neither is values
. :rofl:
Although naming is an important aspect of API design, even nondescriptive names eventually become meaningful through association. S.ap
, anyone? :)
Does anyone wish to further support lookup
? I am open to having my mind changed.
Closes #611
Please let me know if you prefer
lookup
or some other name./cc @daaaaa