On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 03:10:20 +0900, trans.  (T. Onoma) <transami / runbox.com>
wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 December 2004 07:42 am, Austin Ziegler wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 15:56:01 +0900, trans.  (T. Onoma)
>> <transami / runbox.com> wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 08 December 2004 12:00 am, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
>>>> I feel it might be difficult.  Define the following:
>>>>   "abc\n".split("\n").join("\n")
>>>
>>> "abc\n".split("\n",-1).join("\n")
>>> => "abc\n"
>>>
>>> Make default behavior -1.
>> No. Most of the time, I don't actually *want* all the extra crap when I
>> split. This change would break a lot of code silently.
> Really? In all my code I either had to put the -1 in b/c I was getting
> unexpected results (wasting many hours, btw!); or it didn't really matter
> either way --empty strings usually end up in no-effect results.

Really. I just did a quick audit of my publicly released code -- no checks to
see what would be broken if I add -1 -- but NONE of my code uses split with -1,
and I have ~45 split calls in said code. Are YOU going to volunteer to test all
of my code (and everyone else's?) because you don't like adding the -1?

> Might it break code? Sure. But a lot? I doubt it. In fact I suspect some of
> those same programs might have edge cases that would break them for the lack
> of the -1.

*shrug*

My code is written without the -1. If you want this default behaviour changed
-- that's been in Ruby for quite a while -- then you take on the responsibility
for testing all of the code out there. It is not clear that the existing
behaviour is broken.

-austin
-- 
Austin Ziegler * halostatue / gmail.com
               * Alternate: austin / halostatue.ca