> On Jun 16, 2016, at 11:40 AM, Patrick Pijnappel <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hmm, after some consideration I think we should reconsider renaming all of > the exceptions (map => mapped, filter => filtered, etc). > > The main reason to use a term of art is such that people already familiar > with the term will immediately understand it. However as Jonathan points out, > since the modified terms are very close to the terms of art they are unlikely > to hinder in this objective and any initial confusion would be very quickly > and easily recovered from. Any mental pattern matching would quickly transfer > to the Swift forms. > > – Basically all benefits of using a term of art still apply. > – The likelihood, duration and impact of any confusion would all be very low. > – It'd be a lot more consistent (which also aids the mind to learn to pattern > match on -ed/-ing).
I believe my points still apply - Sequences may be one time use and thus mutating (such as a socket-backed Sequence). Neither mapped() nor mapping() is universally appropriate. -DW > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 5:51 PM, David Waite via swift-evolution > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > 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] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > on Thu Jun 16 2016, Jonathan Hull <[email protected] > > <mailto:[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] <mailto:[email protected]> > > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > > <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution> > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution> >
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
