Pavol Droba wrote:
Well, it depends on what you define as 'de-facto' standard. I think that both names are equaly good.
A quick 2-minute search gives me few example in favor of trim_left: - Microsoft - All libraries provieded by microsoft MFC, ATL, .Net, use *Left versions - Symbian API - has TrimLeft
- Probably not very serious, but simple google comparison give following results: "trimhead OR trimhead" : 1,510 results "trim_left OR trimleft" : 40,400 results
I don't have much time to look elsewhere, feel free to supply counterexamples.
I don't have any counterexamples. These examples you supplied are exactly what I meant when I said it's "de-facto standard".
Before considering your proposal, I would really need to see better argument then your personal opinion, since changing a name of a function that is already in use for some time is quite serious issue.
Just my opinion? Strings do not know how they are going to be printed - Left-to-right, right-to-left, top-to-bottom, in diagonal, or in circles. String objects don't have a 'right' or a 'left', only 'head' and 'tail', and that's not just my opinion, that's a fact. All the rest of your functions correctly use head/tail naming, instead of left/right. What is open for discussion is whether to change the name of a function already in use. I agree that it's a serious issue. Perhaps both should be supplied for now, with the right/left gradually deprecated. Or maybe never deprecated and both live together happily ever after. I'm not sure. The important thing is that if you propose it for TR2, I think that it should be head/tail - to be consistent with the rest of the library, and for the noble cause of being correct. Yuval