Method naming inconsistency: first/last versus front/back
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Markdown
- Stars
- 6.6k
- Forks
- 1.7k
- Avg merge
- 16h 14m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 1
Description
All of the collections in the former collections crate use the front/back naming convention, but slice uses a first/last naming convention. I doubt that deprecating the former is a good idea at this rate, but it's worth talking about— should the methods first/last, first/last_mut, split_first/last be renamed to front/back, or should it go the other way?
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by comparing the front/back convention in the former collections crate with slice methods first/last, first/last_mut, and split_first/last. Done requires resolving which naming convention Rust should use and documenting that decision through the RFC process.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- api
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 18/100