Skip to content
Tech News
← Back to articles

Anecdotally, programmers dislike "reduce"

read original more articles
Why This Matters

This piece is a lighthearted but insightful observation about developer culture and code readability preferences, highlighting how functional programming constructs like 'reduce' face more resistance than 'map' or 'filter' despite being equally valid tools. It matters because it touches on broader conversations about code review practices, readability standards, and how team dynamics shape which coding idioms become accepted versus stigmatized.

Key Takeaways

Anecdotally, programmers dislike "reduce"

In short: from my experience, people like map and filter , but not reduce .

I use functions like map and filter all the time. When I put that code up for review, my peers rarely complain. I get plenty of feedback about other decisions, but not about my use of map and filter .

I cannot say the same for reduce . Often, when I’ve submitted a patch with reduce inside, I get a comment like, “this part is hard to read.” And I see reduce way less than map , filter , some , and so on.

Anecdotally, I have come to believe that programmers don’t like reduce as much.

I don’t know why, but I have a few theories:

reduce is harder to read.

is harder to read. reduce is less familiar.

is less familiar. reduce can have worse performance compared to other options.

can have worse performance compared to other options. reduce is less elegant in languages I use, like JavaScript, Python, and Swift. In my blissful stint as a Clojure developer, I did not get this feedback.

... continue reading