For me, I run into this often enough, that I wish this was a thing.
Clearly, YMMV.
Strictly speaking, yes. But I think just updating the *_lazy versions is
sufficient for the level of consistency already present. I mean, there's no
Map.put_lazy when there clearly could be and I don't think not changing
update makes things worse. (sorry for the double negatives there)
The documentation for a revised Map.update would need to be careful. There'
would be a lot going on to explain.
On Friday, May 19, 2023 at 7:54:46 AM UTC-4 woj...@wojtekmach.pl wrote:
> I believe an apples-to-apples comparison would be:
>
> # before
> x
> |> then(&Map.put_new_lazy(&1, :file_path, fn ->
> Path.join([&1.base_path, &1.filename]) end))
>
> # after
> x
> |> Map.put_new_lazy(:file_path, &Path.join([&1.base_path,
> &1.filename]))
>
> And I think it does read better.
>
> That being said, personally I don’t think I have commonly needed something
> like this though and I’d just break out of a pipe and move on. :)
> If we add this precedent, that the function receives the input as one of
> the arguments, should we update other functions for consistency too? Do we
> have an Map.update accepting a 2-arity function? (Is the map the first or
> the second argument?!)
>
> On 19 May 2023, at 13:30, Christian Trosclair <christian...@dockyard.com>
> wrote:
>
> It is sometimes if not often desirable to build up some Map or Keyword
> list and add or update values in such a way that takes into account the
> current state of the data, yet some of the current functions do not allow
> this to be done from a pipe.
>
> A trivial example for instance:
> ```
> map = %{filename: “thing.txt”}
> map = Map.put_new(map, :base_path, "/")
> map = Map.put_new(map, :file_path, Path.join([map.base_path,
> map.filename]))
>
> ```
> This is begging to be piped, but Map.put_new_lazy/3’s function argument
> does not receive the current map.
>
> For reference Map.put_new_lazy/3
>
> https://github.com/elixir-lang/elixir/blob/a64d42f5d3cb6c32752af9d3312897e8cd5bb7ec/lib/elixir/lib/map.ex#L381
>
> It is true we could simply use Kernel.then/2, but I think we can do better
> and make code easier to scan.
>
> An example using pipes and Kernel.then/2
> ```
> %{filename: “thing.txt”}
> |> Map.put_new(:base_path, "/")
> |> then(&(Map.put_new(&1, :file_path, Path.join([&1.base_path,
> &1.filename]))))
>
> ```
> Kernel.then/2 is breaking up what could be a quick scan of the code.
>
> We can smooth this out.
>
> Here is an implementation on Map.put_new_lazy/3
>
> ```
> @spec put_new_lazy(map, key, ((map) -> value)) :: map
> def put_new_lazy(map, key, fun) when is_function(fun, 1) do
> case map do
> %{^key => _value} ->
> map
>
> %{} ->
> put(map, key, fun.(map))
>
> other ->
> :erlang.error({:badmap, other})
> end
> end
>
> ```
> Then we could rewrite the original example like:
>
> ```
> %{filename: “thing.txt”}
> |> Map.put_new(:base_path, "/")
> |> Map.put_new_lazy(:file_path, &(Path.join([&1.base_path, &1.filename]))))
>
> ```
> If we wanted to go even further, we could even accept an arity 2 function
> and pass in both the map and the key.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "elixir-lang-core" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to elixir-lang-co...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/bc728f96-ff11-40c1-b90f-b412e241fbd9n%40googlegroups.com
>
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/bc728f96-ff11-40c1-b90f-b412e241fbd9n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"elixir-lang-core" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to elixir-lang-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/2ea1ed78-45eb-4299-8bfe-2a5f96984709n%40googlegroups.com.
