Sanctuary: Why are `prop` and `props` throwing?
This is more a question, for me learning FP. Why are the functions prop and props throwing an error when the property is not found in the object? This doesn't make prop mappable.
I would have expected a Maybe. fwiw, Ramda returns a | undefined.
amaurym
>All comments
Hello and welcome, @amaurymartiny !
Conceptually, prop and props only operate on records. These are types like the following:
{ name :: String, dob :: Date }
You could use prop ('name') on this value safely, because it must have a name. And you want it to throw if the name is missing, because that would actually be a bug.
What you might be looking for instead are the following functions:
get :: (Any -> Boolean) -> String -> a -> Maybe bgets :: (Any -> Boolean) -> Array String -> a -> Maybe b
Conceptually, they operate mainly on string maps and other types whose keys are not known beforehand. They can even be used to operate on types whose values are unknown beforehand, by using the first argument: a predicate to ensure the gotten value conforms to expectations.
Avaq
on 1 Apr 2019
Related issues
jmatsushita
路
4Comments
davidchambers
路
8Comments
t1ger-0527
路
3Comments
andrei-cacio
路
8Comments
blackxored
路
7Comments
Most helpful comment
Hello and welcome, @amaurymartiny !
Conceptually,
propandpropsonly operate on records. These are types like the following:You could use
prop ('name')on this value safely, because it must have a name. And you want it to throw if the name is missing, because that would actually be a bug.What you might be looking for instead are the following functions:
get :: (Any -> Boolean) -> String -> a -> Maybe bgets :: (Any -> Boolean) -> Array String -> a -> Maybe bConceptually, they operate mainly on string maps and other types whose keys are not known beforehand. They can even be used to operate on types whose values are unknown beforehand, by using the first argument: a predicate to ensure the gotten value conforms to expectations.