Re: RFC 90 (v1) Builtins: zip() and unzip()

[Nathan Wiger]

> With zip/unzip/partition 

I really gotta say, those functions *need* to be renamed, for a variety
of reasons. First, they have well-established computer meanings
(compression, disks). Second, "partition" is too long anyways.

I've seen numerous emails from other people saying the same thing. If
other languages name these functions zip/unzip I'd argue they're wrong.
"mop", "cleave", "weave", "mix", or any other term that doesn't already
have well-established computer meaning is acceptable.

Jeremy, in the next version of the RFC's would you be willing to suggest
some alternatives? Alternatively, pick a different set, but I really
think zip/unzip/partition are (a) confusing and (b) not obviously list
manipulation functions. 

-Nate