Hi,
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 4:54 PM Claude Pache wrote:
>
>
> > Le 8 juil. 2019 à 15:20, Christoph M. Becker a écrit :
> >
> > FTR, there is already substr_compare().
>
> `substr_compare()` (as well as `strncmp()` which I am currently using in lieu
> of `str_starts_with()`) forces you to provide
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 4:53 PM Claude Pache wrote:
>
> > Le 8 juil. 2019 à 15:20, Christoph M. Becker a
> écrit :
> >
> > FTR, there is already substr_compare().
>
> `substr_compare()` (as well as `strncmp()` which I am currently using in
> lieu of `str_starts_with()`) forces you to provides the
> Le 8 juil. 2019 à 15:20, Christoph M. Becker a écrit :
>
> FTR, there is already substr_compare().
`substr_compare()` (as well as `strncmp()` which I am currently using in lieu
of `str_starts_with()`) forces you to provides the substring and the length of
the substring, instead of just the
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019, 12:15 Andrew Gromov wrote:
> > For those voting against adding these functions, can you clarify why?
> > Do you dislike how they are named, or do you not see the need for the
> > case insensitive versions, or is there an issue with the implementation?
>
>
> I believe that sta
