On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:43:40 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
<[email protected]> wrote:
Jason House wrote:
Before reading your post, I was going to say that I'd expect 4, would
accept 1, and consider 2 or 3 to be buggy! Notice how under your new
proposal everyone would still get the behavior wrong when reading the
code.
everyone posting heavily in thiss group != everyone
Not that I care, because I don't use phobos, but you haven't really
presented any good argument that your method is the most intuitive except:
1. Some example of badly written code that outputs extra spaces (I don't
consider this to be common).
2. Perl does it that way.
The way I see it is: when I see a function named "splitter", I think the
function splits a string based on identified token separators. If you
don't think of it that way, fine, you have every right to design Phobos
however you want, despite the fact that 100% of respondants surveyed (so
far) don't agree with your intuition.
I have never thought of a list of tokens with terminators vs. separators.
I think what you should have as an option to split is to be able to ignore
leading or trailing empty items, not "seperator is really terminator"
enums, which would require a paragraph of explanation.
-Steve
