> Stefan Kamphausen writes: > sorry, I'm a little late. However, to me it is not clear what the > trim functions shall do. If they become a replacement for chomp they > are clearly misnamed. In many applications and languages (like Excel, > several SQL variants, oh, and Java, ...) "trim" means stripping of > whitespace characters, including but not limited to \n and \r. In > contrast to that chomp stands for the removal of the system-specific > linebreak.
> Mark Engelberg <mark.engelb...@gmail.com> writes: >> If you're developing a trio, like ltrim, trim, rtrim, wouldn't it be >> better to call them triml, trim, trimr so that they show up next to >> each other in the alphabetized documentation? +1. Please keep all chop, chomp, trim* :D > Therefore I have a little doubt with the implementation of join. It is > a beautiful implementation but not really efficient. Some (nasty > looking) implementation directly using a stringbuilder is more > efficient. (about 2.5 times according to my measureements) +1 functions in core libs should be efficient first, then beautiful. Thats the price to pay for the limelight :). > More generally, i would like to see some overall design principles - > does the library accept nil in place of string arguments? - some > functions do / some not. When are characters acceptable in place of > strings, etc +1 this seems really important. -- 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 Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. 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
