On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Elizabeth Mattijsen wrote:
>> On 27 Jan 2016, at 14:00, Tom Browder wrote:
>>
>> Given so many handy methods for built-in classes, it would be nice to have a
>> couple of more for some, for instance:
>>
>> IO:Path.stemname
From: Tom Browder [mailto:tom.brow...@gmail.com]
>
> Given so many handy methods for built-in classes, it would be nice to have a
> couple of more for some, for instance:
>
> IO:Path.stemname
> Like basename except any suffix is removed
>
> IO::Handle.say (or println)
> Like print
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Elizabeth Mattijsen wrote:
>> On 27 Jan 2016, at 14:00, Tom Browder wrote:
>>
>> Given so many handy methods for built-in classes, it would be nice to have a
>> couple of more for some, for instance:
...
>> IO::Handle.say
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 02:14:17PM +, Philip Hazelden wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:43 PM Peter Pentchev wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 07:00:11AM -0600, Tom Browder wrote:
> > > Given so many handy methods for built-in classes, it would be nice to
> > have
> > >
> On 27 Jan 2016, at 14:00, Tom Browder wrote:
>
> Given so many handy methods for built-in classes, it would be nice to have a
> couple of more for some, for instance:
>
> IO:Path.stemname
> Like basename except any suffix is removed
Seems like a nice idea.
>
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 07:00:11AM -0600, Tom Browder wrote:
> Given so many handy methods for built-in classes, it would be nice to have
> a couple of more for some, for instance:
>
> IO:Path.stemname
> Like basename except any suffix is removed
Hmm, this sounds like a nice idea on a first
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> Right, so that would probably mean that you need a function that removes
> the *last* extension; that might indeed make sense, although it's
> trivial to implement as a regular expression substitution (but also beware
>