Add .pick() and .exclude()

[Richienb]

Fixes: #259

[sindresorhus]

What's the reasoning for going with a single method instead of pick/exclude? Just curious. And why .filterElements() over .filter()?

[Richienb]

What's the reasoning for going with a single method instead of pick/exclude? Just curious. And why .filterElements() over .filter()?

I took inspiration for naming from #259 (comment)

[sindresorhus]

I took inspiration for naming from #259 (comment)

That was a response to other naming suggestions. I think just .filter() is clear enough in this case.

[sindresorhus]

For a better implementation, this could preserve the order of url queries, cause input and output are both strings, which has order. - #259 (comment)

Can you add a test for that?

[Richienb]

Can you add a test for that?

If you mean the order of query parameters, that is already tested.

[sindresorhus]

Which is why the original suggestion was to add .pick() and .exclude() methods, which I still prefer.

@Richienb Any thoughts on this? I think that might be a better API for this.

[Richienb]

@sindresorhus I am waiting on sindresorhus/filter-obj#9 to implement this.

[sindresorhus]

I am waiting on sindresorhus/filter-obj#9 to implement this.

I don't have time to do sindresorhus/filter-obj#9 and doesn't look like anyone else has either, so should we close this PR for now? It's stale and doesn't seem like something will happen here anytime soon.

[Richienb]

@sindresorhus I guess I'll tackle the issue myself.

Since specifying keys to be included and excluded is mutually exclusive, should I add it as a separate option in filter-obj instead of exclamation marks?

[sindresorhus]

Sure