added "collect" alias for "map"

[petejkim]

because other functions also similarly have ruby-like aliases

[jashkenas]

Thanks. I'd be happy to merge this pull request, but please amend it first to not include any auto-generated code (the docco, and the -min version).

[petejkim]

Hello Jake, I have amended the commit to exclude the auto generated code.

[shesek]

Instead of copying tests, isn't it better to simply equals(_.collect, _.map, 'aliased as "collect"');?

[petejkim]

maybe, but other aliases were tested that way.

    answers = [];
    _.forEach([1, 2, 3], function(num){ answers.push(num); });
    equals(answers.join(', '), '1, 2, 3', 'aliased as "forEach"');

[jashkenas]

@shesek: If you want to send a pull req making that change for all aliases ... that would be fine.

[justinperkins]

FWIW, it appears that this alias is not chainable.

// works fine
_.select([1,2,3,3,3], function(i){ return i == 3}).map(function(i){ return i+1})

// does not work, #collect not defined
_.select([1,2,3,3,3], function(i){ return i == 3}).collect(function(i){ return i+1})

[jashkenas]

FWIW, it appears that this alias is not chainable.

Nope, it is. You're just not doing a chain in your example -- you're calling the native map function on a native array. A chain would look like this:

_.chain([1,2,3,3,3]).select(function(i){ return i == 3}).collect(function(i){ return i+1}).value()

[justinperkins]

Ahhh, I didn't realize I had to explicitly set my chaining up like that. Thank you.

I'm using this in the context of a Backbone.js collection, so I have been using the underscore collection methods straight on my collection instance. This chaining syntax requires a bit of a tweak but no big deal.

// what I was trying to do
myCollection.select(...).collect(...)

// what I really need to do
_.chain(myCollection.models).select(...).collect(...)