Add _.pluckPath

[joshuacc]

See jashkenas/underscore#712

This is a natural extension of our existing _.getPath method.

[joshuacc]

@fogus How are you feeling about dependencies between sublibraries these days? The most natural implementation of _.pluckPath would reuse _.getPath internally, but they belong in different sublibraries.

[fogus]

That's a good question that I don't have a good answer for. I do believe
it's fine in theory to add cross dependencies, but if it's a single
functional dependecy maybe we should avoid it. I don't have a good feel for
where the crossover point occurs however.

On Saturday, August 30, 2014, Joshua Clanton [email protected]
wrote:

@fogus https://github.com/fogus How are you feeling about dependencies
between sublibraries these days? The most natural implementation of
_.pluckPath would reuse _.getPath internally, but they belong in
different sublibraries.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#161 (comment)
.

-- http://blog.fogus.me

-- http://github.com/fogus

[joshuacc]

Okay. For now, I'll implement dependency-free. But I do believe that there would be a lot of advantages in consolidating everything into a single library that can share more internal code.

[AlphaGit]

Would this be solved by #175 ?

[joshuacc]

@AlphaGit No. The pluckPath method would operate on an array and return a new array consisting of the values found at the given path. Basically map + getPath.