Agreed, a new document is not necessary, just thinking an addition to the text about features.
I don’t personally care much about this specific function, but more so that this is a class of conversation we have constantly on the mailing list, and as you yourself highlighted earlier, there are some different standards for standard library vs feature contributions in terms of what might be accepted. Only point being having something that could help these discussions, like exactly what you mentioned just now about a lack of corner cases. Sounds useful to appear in the readme or somewhere else. Then the conversation starts with “what kind of corner cases are there” and continue along other guide lines and now we’re all rowing in the same direction. On this specific case, that’s a good point about leading/trailing, but I think it should still be up for consideration with those two names. None of the other functions are protective of different script sets in any specific way right? On Mon, Nov 21 2022 at 3:34 PM, José Valim < jose.va...@dashbit.co > wrote: > > We already cover the relevant policies in our README: > https://github.com/elixir-lang/elixir > > > > As of now, it also includes a link to the Development page. I don't think > a new document would help as it would lead to duplication. > > > > Regarding functions, I think it can be even simpler than what Zach > proposed. We have generally accepted any enhancement to existing functions > and modules that are straightforward and without corner cases. After all, > the biggest issue with truncate are the corner cases in relation to all > scriptsets. For example, I would expect some languages to truncate on the > left? So that by itself already has to reframe the conversation to having > both truncate_suffix and truncate_prefix. There are probably more corner > cases. So it can be 6 LOC in your app, with several assumptions, but > likely many more LOC in Elixir. > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 7:53 PM Christopher Keele < christheke...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > >> > Yeah, features vs functions make sense that they would have different >> leeway, and I think maybe deserves its own rubric. >> >> >> It'd be interesting to see a PR that introduces a new .md file in the >> language repo (or adds to DEVELOPMENT.md) that provides some guidance >> here. Then we can continue the discussion about what exactly belongs there >> at the PR level? >> >> >> On Sunday, November 20, 2022 at 10:56:09 AM UTC-5 zachary....@gmail.com >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Yeah, features vs functions make sense that they would have different >>> leeway, and I think maybe deserves its own rubric. Primarily because >>> "providing a standard set of utilities to do common and basic things" is >>> already a feature of core, so this isn't really about wether or not that >>> feature set should exist, but on what falls under the blanket of things >>> that can be included in the feature. >>> >>> I'd put up something like: >>> >>> >>> Rubric for standard library candidacy: >>> >>> * Does it bring important concepts/features to the community in a way its >>> effect can only be maximized or leveraged by making it part of the >>> language? >>> >>> * Is this a relatively common use case and/or do you find yourself >>> repeating this piece of code across multiple code bases? >>> >>> * Is the proper solution non-obvious, i.e does implementing the function >>> in a performant way involve understanding language internals to a high >>> degree? >>> >>> If you answered yes to one of the questions above, then your function >>> likely belongs in a library. If you answered yes to two or more, then it >>> likely belongs in the standard library. >>> >>> >>> >>> We could grade various things against this rubric, like >>> `String.equivalent?/2`which is only one line of code. But that function is >>> infinitely more useful than a guide somewhere explaining that to actually >>> check string equivalency requires normalization of each string. The >>> solution is very non-obvious, and many wouldn't even think to seek out >>> something better than string1 == string2. So that would pass #2 and #3 on >>> the rubric. >>> >>> Just some ideas. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 10:46 AM, José Valim < jose....@dashbit.co > wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> The general rubric is outlined here: >>>> >>>> >>>> https://elixir-lang.org/development.html >>>> >>>> >>>> However we can give more leeway to functions compared to features. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 16:25 Zach Daniel < zachary.s.dan...@gmail.com > >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> This is the kind of thing I mean when I say having a rubric for std >>>>> library candidacy would be useful. I think how many lines of code >>>>> shouldn't really be the metric, but more some kind of subjective measure >>>>> of how difficult it would be for someone else to provide the right >>>>> implementation on the fly. Regardless of what the rubric looks like, I >>>>> feel like it could guide lots of discussions on this mailing list. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> On Sun, Nov 20 2022 at 3:33 AM, José Valim < jose.va...@dashbit.co > >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Good shout on using String.split_at/2 on the implementation, Zach. It is >>>>>> one of the concerns I raised in the original PR and your solution is >>>>>> quite >>>>>> elegant. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Which also brings another point: if the implementation is 6 LOC (I >>>>>> believe >>>>>> the first two clauses are not strictly necessary), then there is even >>>>>> less >>>>>> reason to add it to Elixir. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 5:43 AM Zach Daniel < zachary.s.dan...@gmail.com >>>>>> > >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> It would be great to come up with some kind of heuristic and/or >>>>>>> consistent >>>>>>> philosophy on what belongs in the standard library, to guide these >>>>>>> discussions. Some kind of rubric could make these kinds of conversations >>>>>>> easier or even prevent them entirely. For me, the main guiding >>>>>>> principles >>>>>>> are whether or not there is exactly one right way to do the thing in >>>>>>> question, how ubiquitous the need for it is, and how obvious the >>>>>>> implementation is (on the flipside, how much we can prevent people from >>>>>>> hidden gotchas they wouldn't even think to reach for a library for). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For example, the implementation actually requires only adding padding if >>>>>>> the string has been trimmed at all, and I'd bet there are lots of >>>>>>> suboptimal implementations out there. Ben's above isn't quite right, >>>>>>> since >>>>>>> the idea is to only add the ellipses if it truncated the string, and >>>>>>> then >>>>>>> it should only add exactly the string provided (not pad it out to the >>>>>>> full >>>>>>> length of the string). Since a performant implementation probably might >>>>>>> not be quite as obvious to the less experienced (with elixir or in >>>>>>> general), and this seems like a relatively common operation (for >>>>>>> rendering >>>>>>> strings in UIs or emails or w/e), I feel like a std library >>>>>>> implementation >>>>>>> could be warranted. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Something like this would probably be better since it avoids checking >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> string length (a linear time operation) and also avoids things like >>>>>>> multiple slice operations in favor of a single traversal up to "length". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ``` >>>>>>> >>>>>>> def truncate("", 0, _), do: "" >>>>>>> >>>>>>> def truncate(_, 0, padding), do: padding >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> def truncate(string, length, padding) when length > 0 do >>>>>>> >>>>>>> case String.split_at(string, length) do >>>>>>> >>>>>>> {leading, ""} -> leading >>>>>>> >>>>>>> {leading, _} -> leading <> padding >>>>>>> >>>>>>> end >>>>>>> >>>>>>> end >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ``` >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Nov 19 2022 at 9:45 PM, Ben Wilson < benwilson...@gmail.com > >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This seems reasonably straight forward to implement in your own code >>>>>>>> base: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ``` >>>>>>>> def truncate(string, length, padding \\ ".") do >>>>>>>> string >>>>>>>> |> String.slice(0, length) >>>>>>>> |> String.pad_trailing(String.length(string), padding) >>>>>>>> end >>>>>>>> ``` >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Not seeing a strong need to include it in the standard library. Just my >>>>>>>> $0.02 >>>>>>>> On Saturday, November 19, 2022 at 2:12:19 PM UTC-5 Kip wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That is comes from Laravel, not PHP core may be an indication it is >>>>>>>>> better >>>>>>>>> implemented in a library? If there is momentum towards adding it to >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> String module I think `String.truncate` would feel more natural to me >>>>>>>>> (its >>>>>>>>> also what Ruby uses). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Its difficult to make guarantees about the printable width though >>>>>>>>> since >>>>>>>>> characters like ZWJ and Bidi text would mean that to do this properly >>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>> not a simple or straight forward situation. For that reason I don't >>>>>>>>> personally think it belongs in Elixir itself. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Saturday, November 19, 2022 at 5:20:21 PM UTC+1 >>>>>>>>> hassanr...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>>> I came across from laravel ( https://laravel.com ) framework, where >>>>>>>>>> there >>>>>>>>>> are a lot of useful functions, I miss those functions in Elixir, One >>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>> the functions is called limit ( >>>>>>>>>> https://laravel.com/docs/9.x/helpers#method-str-limit ) function, I >>>>>>>>>> would >>>>>>>>>> like to have that in elixir. >>>>>>>>>> ``` >>>>>>>>>> iex> String.limit("elixir", 3) >>>>>>>>>> "eli..." >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> iex> String.limit("elixir", 7) >>>>>>>>>> "elixir" >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> iex> String.limit("elixir", 3, "***") >>>>>>>>>> "eli***" >>>>>>>>>> ``` >>>>>>>>>> This function would be really helpful with longer string, we can >>>>>>>>>> limit >>>>>>>>>> long string with some trailing string like (...). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> What do you think? If yes what should be the name you suggest? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> Hassan >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>> Groups >>>>>>>> "elixir-lang-core" group. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>>>>> an >>>>>>>> email to elixir-lang-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/35628c34-c8c4-4558-a985-de87ec7111d3n%40googlegroups.com >>>>>>>> ( >>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/35628c34-c8c4-4558-a985-de87ec7111d3n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer >>>>>>>> ). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups >>>>>>> "elixir-lang-core" group. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>>>> an >>>>>>> email to elixir-lang-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/laoukpzy.f4712342-a7c6-40db-bf00-87e6b393bcd1%40we.are.superhuman.com >>>>>>> ( >>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/laoukpzy.f4712342-a7c6-40db-bf00-87e6b393bcd1%40we.are.superhuman.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer >>>>>>> ). >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>>>> "elixir-lang-core" group. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>>>>> email to elixir-lang-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAGnRm4JdT9gQpyjKVXQKg1Rv63BPht1UT59a3QTF4K4Uz8RNOA%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>> ( >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAGnRm4JdT9gQpyjKVXQKg1Rv63BPht1UT59a3QTF4K4Uz8RNOA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer >>>>>> ). >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>>> "elixir-lang-core" group. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>>>> email to elixir-lang-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/lapicugp.dc81ce3d-24c7-4d9c-b67c-c56491a0be01%40we.are.superhuman.com >>>>> ( >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/lapicugp.dc81ce3d-24c7-4d9c-b67c-c56491a0be01%40we.are.superhuman.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer >>>>> ). >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>> "elixir-lang-core" group. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>>> email to elixir-lang-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAGnRm4Kkxf3hS-uCWk6BKsrBcRkNvSd9U1Oq8uOnrbnt7nuFpQ%40mail.gmail.com >>>> ( >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAGnRm4Kkxf3hS-uCWk6BKsrBcRkNvSd9U1Oq8uOnrbnt7nuFpQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer >>>> ). >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "elixir-lang-core" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to elixir-lang-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/1ab12035-8729-4a77-8a3c-7ff7691328d0n%40googlegroups.com >> ( >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/1ab12035-8729-4a77-8a3c-7ff7691328d0n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer >> ). >> > > > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "elixir-lang-core" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to elixir-lang-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAGnRm4Kg1aWK%2B2Ext_8vpm-NuNMabn5Oy9nC85Y%3DmAEFkACJmA%40mail.gmail.com > ( > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAGnRm4Kg1aWK%2B2Ext_8vpm-NuNMabn5Oy9nC85Y%3DmAEFkACJmA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer > ). > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elixir-lang-core" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to elixir-lang-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/lar9nsms.cd652354-9293-4ead-a255-e92167f4a4ac%40we.are.superhuman.com.
