std.uni.toLowerCase / .toUpperCase

[Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d]

On 24/06/15 03:05, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:

> Well, it's true, any chosen decision is going to be a compromise.
>
> Appending "Lazy" is only easy because the work to come up with suitable
> names has already been done for the eager variants. Finding suitable
> names for the lazy variants would entail doing similar work, perhaps
> with a bit more effort to communicate that this version is not eager.

It's hard enough to come up with one good name, it will be even harder 
to come up with a second name. Trying to come up with names indicating 
one is eager and one is lazy will be almost impossible.

> I'll collect some data tomorrow to see if it's possible to find a
> likeable convention for lazy function names. But even if this will fail
> and we'll have to settle for inconsistency, I think overall the
> situation will still be better than having "Lazy" sprinkled everywhere.
> It will also be consistent with the names so far (e.g. join/joiner) :)

join/joiner is almost as bad as setExtension/setExt.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg