If we’re bikeshedding the verb tense then “compactMap” sounds right to me, and adding “ing” would be needlessly verbose.
For the non-mapping version, I’d lean toward “compacted”. However, we could also postpone the debate over its spelling until such time as we are actually ready to introduce it. Nevin On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 6:42 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution < swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > > On Dec 19, 2017, at 2:28 PM, Xiaodi Wu via swift-evolution < > swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > I disagree. Let’s not reopen what is settled. “Compact” can be a noun just > as “map” and “filter” can; as long as there are no in-place variants, there > can be no ambiguity. > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 17:11 Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution < > swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > >> On Dec 19, 2017, at 8:56 AM, John McCall <rjmcc...@apple.com> wrote: >> >> Therefore, SE-0187 is *accepted*, with the *revision* that the new name >> be Sequence.compactMap(_:), and with the agreement that we will add >> Sequence.compact() when it is possible to do so. >> >> >> I like `compact` as the basis for the name, but I hope the core team will >> consider whether the eventual nil-removal method should be called >> `compacting()`, and whether therefore this method should be called >> `compactingMap(_:)`. Prior art on the name `compact()` does exist, but I >> don't think it's strong enough to justify deviating from the API Guidelines. >> >> I don't think we need a full review on this tiny issue; five minutes of >> the core team's time should more than suffice. >> > > I agree with Brent. IMO we're firmly outside the domain of established > terms-of-art here (Ruby notwithstanding). > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > swift-evolution@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > >
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
