Web Dev full-stack [LAMP] since 2005, but much heavier on the JS stuff these days.
Jack of all Stacks, Master of some.
Always looking to learn new things. Always glad to help out, just ask.
Location
Atlanta, GA
Education
B.S. in Biochemistry 2004, M.S. in Computer Information Systems 2007
It's not a bad approach, but MAP should be used for simple events, most of the time when you loop through an array you're going to be doing a lot more than just one thing. In those cases, use a for loop if you don't want to hate yourself six months later.
Also your naming convention is what makes your for loop harder to read.
This is far simpler to understand, now, AND in six months versus the MAP method.
for (let i = 0; i < names.length; i++) {
const reversedname = names[i].split('').reverse().join('');
reversednames.push(reversedname);
}
/Disclaimer/
I'm super anti-camelcase. Using lowercase names and keeping them short makes your code immediately easier to read, plus you will NEVER have a syntax bug because you typo'd an uppercase letter, so hours saved. You can use underscores if needed.
Was it not for the example above being descriptive i'd probably just go with
"revs" in place of "reversednames" and "rname" in place of "reversedname".
Just to simplify the code more.
Your variable names should not overtake the logic visibly.
For smaller logics, having a for-loop is no problem at all, but as I mentioned here, we have logics were we're doing multiple processes on array like sorting/filtering/reducing to one value, map() is imo better as we can do it in one place.
Also array methods like map() and filter() and reduce() are an integral part of todays frontend development as no backend gives us all the customization we want in the response and thus we always have to manipulate data in frontend and same as for-loop or forEach loop, these array methods are integral part of processing the data in frontend so a developer imo should be enough familiar with these methods to even understand code that he has not written. ( to be noted that I am not supporting bad code styles or anything here ).
And libraries like Lodash came into existence for the need of finding and creating and manipulating data and with it's API where we can chain processing to be done on array, it makes our work a lots of easier than writing a for loop every time we want to execute certain processes on an array.
I think there's a balance to be struck in terms of maintainability when naming variables. Sure, overly verbose variable names are clunky and can make things harder to read, but on the other hand revs and rname a) gives me no context (is revs something about revolutions?) and b) can be easily misread (looks a quite similar to mame).
I think with IDEs, things like typos become far less of a problem, so I'd personally stay away from lots of abbreviations.
I also think that this specific task fits quite well with your suggestion of what .map() should be used with. It's short, single manipulation and, with proper naming and shorthand functions, is quite succinct:
I also agree with you that with the modern age of IDEs and linters, typos have become far less of a problem unless we're doing something over ssh on a raspberry pi and have to use vim or nano. But if I am to do real programming on ssh, I would prefer using vscode remote containers mode and code there rather programming in vim / nano on over ssh.
Don't let the vim enthusiasts hear that! You'll be stuck for hours as they tell you the 9000 ways of making vim fully sentient and writing the code for you haha!
True to that. I've done that many times myself as I am a big VIM fan and even use VSCode vim mode today. I've used it as my main developing software for a year but the problem begun when I started working professionally as a fronend dev, other people were using .editorconfig and prettier and stuff which I found were a bit ( for me ) cumbersome to implement and therefore I switched to VSCode. Though my love for Vim and it's ways to handle things is eternal.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
It's not a bad approach, but MAP should be used for simple events, most of the time when you loop through an array you're going to be doing a lot more than just one thing. In those cases, use a for loop if you don't want to hate yourself six months later.
Also your naming convention is what makes your for loop harder to read.
This is far simpler to understand, now, AND in six months versus the MAP method.
const names = ['anhsirK', 'nosaJ', 'nolE', 'drawdE'];
let reversednames = [];
for (let i = 0; i < names.length; i++) {
const reversedname = names[i].split('').reverse().join('');
reversednames.push(reversedname);
}
/Disclaimer/
I'm super anti-camelcase. Using lowercase names and keeping them short makes your code immediately easier to read, plus you will NEVER have a syntax bug because you typo'd an uppercase letter, so hours saved. You can use underscores if needed.
Was it not for the example above being descriptive i'd probably just go with
"revs" in place of "reversednames" and "rname" in place of "reversedname".
Just to simplify the code more.
Your variable names should not overtake the logic visibly.
For smaller logics, having a
for-loopis no problem at all, but as I mentioned here, we have logics were we're doing multiple processes on array like sorting/filtering/reducing to one value,map()is imo better as we can do it in one place.Also array methods like
map()andfilter()andreduce()are an integral part of todays frontend development as no backend gives us all the customization we want in the response and thus we always have to manipulate data in frontend and same as for-loop or forEach loop, these array methods are integral part of processing the data in frontend so a developer imo should be enough familiar with these methods to even understand code that he has not written. ( to be noted that I am not supporting bad code styles or anything here ).And libraries like Lodash came into existence for the need of finding and creating and manipulating data and with it's API where we can chain processing to be done on array, it makes our work a lots of easier than writing a for loop every time we want to execute certain processes on an array.
I think there's a balance to be struck in terms of maintainability when naming variables. Sure, overly verbose variable names are clunky and can make things harder to read, but on the other hand
revsandrnamea) gives me no context (isrevssomething about revolutions?) and b) can be easily misread (looks a quite similar tomame).I think with IDEs, things like typos become far less of a problem, so I'd personally stay away from lots of abbreviations.
I also think that this specific task fits quite well with your suggestion of what
.map()should be used with. It's short, single manipulation and, with proper naming and shorthand functions, is quite succinct:reversedNames = names.map(name => name.split('').reverse().join(''))I also agree with you that with the modern age of IDEs and linters, typos have become far less of a problem unless we're doing something over ssh on a raspberry pi and have to use vim or nano. But if I am to do real programming on ssh, I would prefer using vscode remote containers mode and code there rather programming in vim / nano on over ssh.
Don't let the vim enthusiasts hear that! You'll be stuck for hours as they tell you the 9000 ways of making vim fully sentient and writing the code for you haha!
True to that. I've done that many times myself as I am a big VIM fan and even use VSCode vim mode today. I've used it as my main developing software for a year but the problem begun when I started working professionally as a fronend dev, other people were using .editorconfig and prettier and stuff which I found were a bit ( for me ) cumbersome to implement and therefore I switched to VSCode. Though my love for Vim and it's ways to handle things is eternal.