Did you consider an optional argument to string-trim? Robby
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 6:53 AM, Eli Barzilay <e...@barzilay.org> wrote: > Should (string-trim str sep) remove any number of `sep' matches or > just one? (This makes no difference for the default `sep' since it's > #px"\\s+".) Possible options below, feel free to mail me off-list to > reduce noise. > > 1. Yes. > * Advantage: makes life with string separator a bit easier. For > example, remove only newlines with (string-trim str "\n") > * Disadvantage: can be confusing with strings or regexps like "xy". > For example: > (string-trim ", , foo, bar, " #rx", *") => "foo, bar" > > 2. No. Flipped dis/advantages. > > 3. Yes for string separators, no for (p)regexp separators. Tries to > get both advantages, but at the cost of non-uniform behavior. > > I'm leaning towards #2 since (a) it's less surprising in the regexp > and >=2 string cases, and (b) it'll make similar to other functions > like `string-split' where an implicit repetition is a bad idea (eg, > when you split with "," you'd usually want that to mean #rx"," not > #rx",+"). OTOH, I hate to loose the possibly useful case of > 1-character strings. > > -- > ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay: > http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life! > _________________________ > Racket Developers list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
