Hi
Am 2025-07-01 10:17, schrieb Adam Cable:
Thanks for giving an explanation of your vote, thank you.
I had assumed that going with a small RFC for this would be easier than
trying to get str_starts/ends_with through at the same time, as noted
in
the PR:
"I'll create a RFC for this, and if successful look to do the same with
str_starts_with and str_ends_with"
I generally prefer splitting RFCs into its “atomic parts” that make
sense on its own, since that makes it easier to discuss the RFC and
ensures that features compose well.
However in this case, the other functions are *so similar* in practice
that it would make sense to handle them all at the same time, including
figuring out naming / the bigger picture. Otherwise we might end up with
`str_icontains()` and `stri_starts_with()` (since `str_istarts_with()`
is ugly by the folks discussing the next RFC) - which clearly is
undesirable.
Best regards
Tim Düsterhus
