Hi, I would generally agree with Stuart that wrapping Java functions is not a good idea.
However, string functions come up so often that I think that this is one area where the rule should be broken, if only for readablility. Making str-utils kick-ass is a great idea. pc On Mar 24, 7:05 pm, Sean <francoisdev...@gmail.com> wrote: > Okay, I've made some changes to my proposed str-utils. I've also got > a few answers to some of the issues Stuart raised. > > New Changes > > 1. re-strip is now lazy > I re-wrote this method to used the re-partition method in str-utils. > This enables the laziness, and helped be consolidate my Java > interactions into fewer functions. > > 2. re-strip options changed > I removed the ability to pass a :limit option. I replaced it > with :offset and :length options. Seemed to make the function more > flexible :) > > 3. created nearby function > The nearby function returns a lazy sequence of strings "nearby" the > input string. It's inspired by the Norvig spellchecker example. I'd > like to propose adding this method to the library, because I'm > interested in what uses creative people will have for it. > > 4. Added README.html > This file contains usage on every method in my proposed str-utils > > Response to Stuart's Issues > You've raised some good points with my proposal. However, I think > there is some hidden value in including the functions in the library. > > 1. Repeated > The main reason I have for including the repeated methods > (trim,strip,downcase,upcase) in the str-utils library is program > flow. Take the following two examples > > (map downcase a-list) > > (map #(. % toLowerCase) a-list) > > It's my purely subjective opinion that the first method reads much > nicer. I'm also a web developer, so I do a lot of string processing. > I have a subjective preference for functions that make code more > concise, and my code will read a little shorter with the downcase > function in it. > > I guess my main argument is that a more concise way of stating the > same thing does add value. For example, the jQuery selector can be > called using the function jQuery(). However, it is always written $() > to save time. In my view, the $() shortcut does add value. This is > why I think you should consider adding my repeated methods to str- > utils. > > 2. Methods in Apache Commons > The second issue you raise is with methods like capitalize, that are > available in Apache Commons. First of all, the exact reasoning I went > through above could easily be applied to the following s-exp > > (map capitalize a-list) > > However, I believe there is an additional reason for including these > methods in the library. By requiring Apache Commons, you've increased > the number of jars I need to maintain. Granted, a lot of people are > used to using the commons. It is still one more thing that requires > maintenance, though. By making capitalize (and others) part of > contrib, it reduces the amount of work I have to do to get this > functionality. > > In conclusion, I'd recommend making the str-utils one of the slickest > libraries in Clojure. As developers, we know how strong string > manipulation makes writing code easier. If Clojure has incredible > string support, developers will be more impressed. Let's go out of > our way to make string manipulation in Clojure easier than in any > other language. > > Besides, once we get a kick-ass string library working, we can then > abstract the routines to work on any pattern of symbols, and give our > macro writers a boost. > > Sean > > On Mar 24, 2:22 pm, Stuart Sierra <the.stuart.sie...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mar 23, 9:46 pm, Sean <francoisdev...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >http://github.com/francoisdevlin/clojure-str-utils-proposal/tree/master > > > > I'm not sure what the directory structure should be for everything > > > still. Perhaps somebody can point out how it should be done. > > > > I'll put the original post in the README > > > > Long story short: multi-methods could be awesome > > > Hi Sean, > > > This is interesting. One quick comment, though: the trim, strip, > > upcase, and downcase functions don't add anything to the original Java > > methods. Rich and others have warned against adding wrapper functions > > just to hide Java. > > > Some of these functions, like capitalize, are available in Apache > > Commons Lang, the "StringUtils" class. > > > -Stuart Sierra --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
