[Question] Clarification of example. about recompose

[acdlite]

Thanks for the feedback!

1. It's pretty close. The return isn't really needed. You're using arrow functions inside setCounter(), which isn't ES5. The arguments list is wrong, which I'll address below.
2. The props mapper receives a single argument: the props passed down from the owner. In this case, the props are counter, setCounter, and whatever additional props are passed to <CounterContainer> So if the owner renders <CounterContainer foo="bar" bar="baz" />, then ...rest is an object containing counter, foo, and bar.
3. This is taking advantage of object destructuring inside the arguments list.

The fixed ES5 example looks like this:

mapProps(function(props) {
  return Object.assign({}, props, {
    increment: function() { props.setCounter(function(n) { return n + 1; }); },
    decrement: function() { props.setCounter(function(n) { return n - 1; }); },
  });
})

As you can see, ES2015 features make a big difference here, especially arrow functions. I think it's fairly safe to assume that most people who would be interested in using Recompose will be mostly familiar with ES2015 features, since Babel is the official solution for compiling JSX.

However, I agree with you that for someone who's not as familiar with things like ES2015, or currying, or function composition, or higher-order components... it may be all a bit overwhelming. Perhaps when I have the time to build a proper docs site, we can do something similar to what @gaearon did with his code snippets for React DnD, which can be toggled between ES5/ES6/ES7.

[queckezz]

This is pretty accurate, yes. You can't return an object inline with arrow functions since the compiler can't differentiate between { as the start of an object literal or the start of the function body. To get around that you wrap it in ():

// won't work
const vector = (x, y) => { x, y }

//works
const vector = (x, y) => ({ x, y })

The Notion function({ setCounter, ...reset }) is called destructuring in ES2015. Basically instead of doing

mapProps(function(props) {
  var setCounter = props.setCounter
  var rest = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments, 1); // rest of the properties of `props`
})

You can just get the properties you want to modify and create a new object that merges the existing properties with the modified ones.

If it helps, here would be the ES5 non-immutable way:

mapProps(function(props) {
  var setCounter = props.setCounter

  var decrement = function () {
    setCounter(function (n) {
        return n - 1
    })
  }

  var increment = function () {
    setCounter(function (n) {
        return n + 1
    })
  }

  props.increment = increment
  props.decrement = decrement
  return props
})

[acdlite]

@queckezz Ooh, I know you're trying to be helpful, but please don't modify the props object, even in an example. Don't want anyone to get confused and think that's okay :)

Here's that snippet updated to use a new object:

mapProps(function(ownerProps) {
  var setCounter = ownerProps.setCounter

  var decrement = function () {
    return setCounter(function (n) {
        return n - 1
    })
  }

  var increment = function () {
    return setCounter(function (n) {
        return n + 1
    })
  }

  var props = {}
  props.increment = increment
  props.decrement = decrement
  return props
})