Software Engineering Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professionals, academics, and students working within the systems development life cycle. It only takes a minute to sign up.

Sign up to join this community

Anybody can ask a question

Anybody can answer

The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Why is deep plucking a bad idea?

Ask Question

Asked 8 years, 4 months ago

Modified 8 years, 4 months ago

Viewed 460 times

1

Both underscore and lodash refuse to implement deep plucking, despite many requests from users and gists or modules that implement the feature.

_([{o:{a:1}},{o:{a:43}},{o:{a:234}},{o:{a:23}}]).pluck("o.a")

Why is deep plucking a bad idea?

edited Aug 5, 2015 at 23:34

asked Aug 5, 2015 at 22:22

Dan Dascalescu

9061 gold badge7 silver badges16 bronze badges

8

What the heck is "deep plucking"? And how is it different from the property chaining implicit in JSON and bog-standard JavaScript?
– DougM
Aug 5, 2015 at 23:24
4

Nope, we don't want to stray into "string programming". Instead, use map, or a more robust syntax like JSONPath.
– Robert Harvey
Aug 5, 2015 at 23:25
3

I wonder why no one proposed simply using an array of property names like _.pluck(..., ['a', 'o']), instead of a string in some questionable path format that needs parsing.
– Ixrec
Aug 5, 2015 at 23:27
@Ixrec: XPath works similarly for XML.
– Robert Harvey
Aug 6, 2015 at 7:23
underscore-contrib includes _.getPath that will accept an array of property names and a JSONPath string: documentcloud.github.io/underscore-contrib/#getpath
– Alpha
Aug 10, 2015 at 22:12

Add a comment |

0

Your Answer

Sign up or log in

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Browse other questions tagged
javascript
array
object
or ask your own question.