On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 15:04:47 -0500, Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Well, this has been let slide far too long -- it's time to address >string formatting and transformations. I know some folks have nudged >on this stuff, so lets get it going. > >Here's a list of the string transformation stuff I think we need: > >upcase >downcase >swapcase >upcase first letter >downcase first letter > >And yes, I know these are meaningless for a good chunk of the encoded >data, but that's fine. If there are reasonable text transforms for >non-latin alphabets we can see about getting those in. If there's a >reason that the sequence "downcase/upcase first" is insufficient to >turn a string lower-case except for the first character someone speak >up and we'll add in a specialty entry for that. > >As for formatting, I think we can reasonably provide both >sprintf-style formatting and more traditional COBOL-style formatting. >(Which, yes, I know, is generally viewed as nasty, but being able to >throw an integer into a "$(999,990.00)" format and get a nicely done >money display is really handy) I'm not, however, sure whether it's Even the crummiest language that ever made the grade has a nice feature or two... >worth making an op for one or both of these, or throwing them into >the standard library. (I can see a good case for building the >standard library into the Parrot executable as well, though I'm not >sure I want to do that as it'll make it tough to upgrade) > >So, anyway, opinions? FWIW, I prefer the idea of a smaller, stable core and as much as possible (performance/infrequently used based) out in a more easily user-modifiable support file. Of the above (IMO), up & downcase are core functions, the rest not. Pete PS If there is such a thing as the standard library, for Parrot, I have not yet found it.
