On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 16:09, Meikel Brandmeyer <m...@kotka.de> wrote: > Hi, > > Am 03.01.2012 um 12:16 schrieb Cedric Greevey: > >> Breaking changes are bad enough without making some of them >> gratuitous. They could have just renamed the namespace without also >> renaming some of the individual functions. :) > > One could also argue the other way around: When we break things already, we > can break it really hard and also clean up inconsistent naming of functions > and such. Then you have the pain of a breaking change only once. > > That said: I don't know whether considerations like this were the case here. >
I think you'll find that the trim/triml/trimr naming came from thread "review the clojure.string code" from between 2010-05-30 and 2010-06-03. The trimr/triml/trim naming has the nice property of clustering the three functions together in documentation (which tends to be sorted by name). // Ben -- 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
