Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Is there a need for a real object in this library? #22

Open
igorsantos07 opened this issue Jan 20, 2017 · 1 comment
Open

Is there a need for a real object in this library? #22

igorsantos07 opened this issue Jan 20, 2017 · 1 comment

Comments

@igorsantos07
Copy link
Contributor

igorsantos07 commented Jan 20, 2017

It would be much more friendly if the library was just a pack of functions, just like lodash or many others.

Why do we need to instantiate an empty object so we use the functions?
That also blocks us to rename functions when importing (i.e. futureValue makes more sense than a FV acronym, for laymen looking at the code).

@alfreema
Copy link

alfreema commented Dec 6, 2023

I just posted this in another issue, but for anyone running into this:

I just recreated this package by refactoring it into simple javascript functions, modularizing it, and splitting out the tests. I used the exact same test cases as in this package to verify the functions, but I switched from mocha to jest.

Here is my new repository for anyone interested: https://github.com/alfreema/finance

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants