Awesome, thank you. I'll use that in the future, and I voted for the issue with the proposed patch. I think "parts" makes it much clearer, and then the example also is spot on as it is.
Ciao! On Wednesday, 13 January 2021 at 01:58:55 UTC+1 Alex Miller wrote: > The best place to ask questions like this is at https://ask.clojure.org, > which is the official forum to file requests/bug reports (and get turned > into tickets after triage there). > > It turns out you are not the first to point this out and it has already > been filed at https://clojure.atlassian.net/browse/CLJ-1857 and was then > duped to include changes in https://clojure.atlassian.net/browse/CLJ-1360 > which is still open. I will try to get that included in 1.11. > > You can (and should!) vote for this issue at > https://ask.clojure.org/index.php/4282/doc-that-clojure-string-split-strips-trailing-delimiters > > (which is the ask.clojure question corresponding to that last ticket). > Votes really do matter in our prioritization! > > Alex > > On Tuesday, January 12, 2021 at 2:17:28 PM UTC-6 oliver...@gmail.com > wrote: > >> Happy new year, folks. >> >> (Might not be the best place to post this, but I failed to find a better >> one, please advise if there is. I've also tried to look for previous >> comments about this. If there are, then my Google-fu was simply too weak.) >> >> https://clojuredocs.org/clojure.string/split says: >> ------ >> Usage: >> (split s re) >> (split s re limit) >> >> Splits string on a regular expression. Optional argument limit is the >> maximum number of splits. Not lazy. Returns vector of the splits. >> ------ >> >> Where I initially understand "number of splits" to be the number of >> matches acted upon, that's where a split occurs. I realize there's another >> meaning of "split", meaning fragment, and that is the one meant here. >> "Returns vector of the splits." hints at that as well, but it literally >> says "splits string on..., ... maximum number of splits.". >> >> And even in the same docs a few lines later the example for this is >> phrased like this: >> ------ >> ;; Note that the 'limit' arg is the maximum number of strings to >> ;; return (not the number of splits) >> user=> (str/split "q1w2e3r4t5y6u7i8o9p0" #"\d+" 5) ["q" "w" "e" "r" >> "t5y6u7i8o9p0"] >> ------ >> Contradicting the upper description with "(not the number of splits)". >> >> I've run into this more than once now, because different languages do >> this differently. Whenever I go to the documentation, I read the >> description and am satisfied that I've grokked it, just to be mocked by my >> off-by-one code minutes later. >> >> Does anyone agree that this might be worth changing? >> I think at least the contradiction in the example should be addressed, >> but I think a better solution would be to rephrase the main description to >> be unambiguous. >> >> I've also looked up a few documentations in other languages. Those that >> limit the number of "splits" in my sense (number of matches at which to >> split) use the word "splits", those with a behaviour similar to that of >> Clojure explicitly talk about the maximum number of resulting >> elements/substrings/strings, and I think that would make it much clearer. >> >> Apologies for the length! >> >> Cheerio >> Oliver >> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/clojure/0d6a3739-8591-438e-b086-ad4cc8ae94e8n%40googlegroups.com.
