> On July 25, 2013, 9 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote: > > I actually quite like the underscore.js library, what would be the benefit > > from eliminating it? > > Ross Allen wrote: > `forEach` is implemented in Angular, and so Underscore's implementation > is duplicate JavaScript. Underscore is great, but if Angular implements the > functionality the UI needs, then we could drop a dependency.
After talking yesterday and an email about browser support, it makes more sense to move to the native Array.forEach implementation rather than temporarily move to angular.forEach for the sake of not using Underscore. Nuking this commit from orbit. - Ross ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/12830/#review23861 ----------------------------------------------------------- On July 23, 2013, 2:14 a.m., Ross Allen wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/12830/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated July 23, 2013, 2:14 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos. > > > Repository: mesos-git > > > Description > ------- > > Prefer "angular.forEach" to Underscore's "_.each" > > Angular has no dependency on Underscore, and so it would be great to > remove any libraries that overlap with functionality provided by > Angular. > > "angular.forEach" delegates to the native "forEach" if it exists like > Underscore. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/webui/master/static/js/controllers.js > dae12b61001ff0c7379169242e5d125ef6ca141b > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/12830/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Ross Allen > >
