Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from March 2021
Per the email from PSC I'm starting a conversation about the trim() implementation I'd like to land in core. To get yourself up to speed: Issue <https://github.com/Perl/perl5/issues/17952> and Pull Request <https://github.com/Perl/perl5/pull/17999> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ As a starting point I'm going to repost my last comment as I think it's sums up my position as main author and proponent of this feature: > Per my original comment in #17952 > <https://github.com/Perl/perl5/issues/17952> there are many other > languages that implement |trim()| and *all* of them implement it as a > return value. Also, the vast majority of CPAN modules, and darkcpan > implementations do so as a return value. People /expect/ |trim()| to > return a value just from broader experience in other languages, and > modules. > > I can count on two fingers the number of times I've used |chomp()|, so > copying it's model is not my first choice. Every time I've needed > |chomp()| I've opted instead for my homegrown |trim()| instead. > > Personally I don't see a use case for in-place, but if we're requiring > an implementation that operates in-place it should *not* be called > |trim()|. I would instead propose something like: > > 1. |trim()| returns the value > 2. |trimi()| (i for in-place), |trimmer()|, or as Mithaldu joked > |tromp()| would operate in-place. > > This will keep us consistent with other languages, while also offering > a chomp-like implementation. Awaiting further guidance from PSC as to > next steps. >Thread Next