I think I learned this either from Rustor functional programming but there's an idea that for loops are considered harmful.

The danger

Consider the following:

days := make([]int, 30)

for i = 0; i < 31; i++ {
days[i] = i
}

This is a banal example, but this code introduces the possibility for an indexing error.

The solution

There are a few ways to mitigate these problems.

Mapping

Most for loops you see in the wild are just mappings of some kind or another. Mapping is when you want a 1:1 derivation of a new value from an old value.

const numbers = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5];
const areOddOrEven = [];

for (let i = 0; i < numbers.length; i++) {
areOddOrEven[i] = numbers[i] % 2 === 0;
}

console.log(areOddOrEven);

[false (\, true) (\, false) (\, true) (\, false)]

This example is a mapping from number to bool, where what we're mapping is whether or not a number is even. It could be rewritten as:

const numbers = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5];
const areEvenOrOdd = numbers.map(v => v % 2 === 0);
console.log(areEvenOrOdd);

[false (\, true) (\, false) (\, true) (\, false)]

Mapping, in general, could be implemented as such:

function map(arr, fn) {
const res = [];
for (let i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
res[i] = fn(arr[i]);
}

return res;
}

Reduction

reduce functions are thought of as "summary" or "rollup" functions.

const numbers = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5];
let sum = 0;
for (let i = 0; i < numbers.length; i++) {
sum += numbers[i];
}
console.log(sum);

15 undefined

This could be just as easily written as:

const numbers = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5];
const sum = numbers.reduce((sum, val) => sum + val, 0);
console.log(sum);

15 undefined

This could be generally implemented as:

function reduce(coll, fn, init) {
let res = init;

for (let i = 0; i < coll.length; i++) {
res = fn(res, coll[i]);
}

return res;
}

const numbers = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5];
const sum = reduce(numbers, (sum, val) => sum + val, 0);
console.log(sum);

15 undefined