Stuck on an issue?

Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.

And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.

lodash dependency

See original GitHub issue

Looking through the code, the majority of lodash usage is extremely basic, most of it is just things like isFunction and isObject. I’m curious if there has been any discussion about dropping the lodash dependency entirely? Seems like a pretty large burden just for basic type checking functions.

Issue Analytics

State:
Created 7 years ago
Reactions:1
Comments:6 (3 by maintainers)

Top GitHub Comments

1reaction

timchecommented, Aug 31, 2016

I’ve just seen that Redux is also using lodash. So lodash will be installed and bundled anyway if you are using Redux in your project.

Imo lodash has also become a standard library and as I said above, it gives us safety that things are working. It is also known to be performant out of the box and makes the code more readable, so I don’t think that we are dropping lodash completely except for the things that can also be written natively.

0reactions

arbcommented, Aug 31, 2016

I didn’t realize redux was using it. Bummer. Well with that in mind it would make sense to leave lodash in since it’s already sort of part of the ecosystem.