Tyro[17]:
With that clarification, I just have one more question, since flip does what is intuitively implied by a reverse function
OK, better to name it reversedArgs :-)
and flip2 does what is intuitively implied by a flip function,
flip2 swaps just the fist two arguments and leaves the others at their place.
I would expect a flip and flip2 if both accomplish the exact same thing but both outperforms the other in certain scenarios thus warranting both to be present.
I think that the caos of this thread shows that keeping both will cause confusion :-(
why not name them as such? Understand the Haskell influence and all but, influence notwithstanding, this is D so why not designate functions in a manner that intuitively imply functionality?
I am starting to agree with Andrei. Short function names are handy, but in many situations the semantic confusion they can bring is not worth it. More food for thought for me.
Bye, bearophile
