isiahmeadows at gmail.com
Thu Jul 19 08:49:20 UTC 2018
What about this alternate proposal:
(I've got a myriad of other related stuff there, too.)
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018, 04:41 Dmitry Shulgin <shulhindvst at gmail.com> wrote:
> Above we was talking about this.
> consistency and handy using -- two main reasons for this proposal.
> `reverse` will also mutate my array, cause of in-place implementation.
> You can find workaround for many existing methods, but it's not handy to
> my mind.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss