On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Tom Browder <tom.brow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> But I've tried it and it works (but the syntax still bothers me for
> now).  Note that the same behavior applies to the 'substr' string
> method so that begs the question of why is the 'substr-rw' method
> justified and 'trim-rw' not?  It seems at first glance that the
> 'substr-rw' method should be removed.

IIRC substr-rw is a performance hack because substr was being slowed in all
cases in order to accommodate the rw use case. trim doesn't have the same

brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates
allber...@gmail.com                                  ballb...@sinenomine.net
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad        http://sinenomine.net

Reply via email to