I’ve always considered the term of art argument to be at least partially a red herring.
These methods are difficult because you don’t have guarantees of non-mutability until you get to Collection - on Sequence, a dropFirst method may mean that neither the original nor returned sequence can address that item anymore. Names have to indicate that a Sequence may or may not consume an item. It makes me wonder if we should evaluate doing something more aggressive, such as eliminating the support of one-time/destructive Sequences completely. -DW > On Jun 16, 2016, at 8:45 AM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > on Thu Jun 16 2016, Jonathan Hull <[email protected]> wrote: > >> …Thus, I don’t really see the harm in renaming these to match the rest >> of Swift. It won’t cause any confusion that can’t be easily recovered >> from. > > I'm beginning to think you may be right. > > -- > -Dave > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
