Jarrad Whitaker

Thinking about it, I think it would only give more functionality than `tail |` if combined with online editing. (or if used on platforms without `tail`).

This is really a subcase of everything-is-an-expression, isn't it? That's why it works in the languages people are coming from (ML-based, Rust, Haskell, ...) If you would consider that approach...

Its not so much about filling use case checkboxes, it's more (again, just from user perspective here) about consistency. There are already special cases that work towards this: your alternative...

naïve implementation: ```jl function DataFrames.unstack(df::DataFrame, rowKeys::AbstractVector{Symbol}, colKey::Symbol, valueCols::AbstractVector{Symbol}, renameCols) unstacked = [ unstack(df, rowKeys, colKey, valueCol, renamecols=(c) -> renameCols(c, valueCol)) for valueCol in valueCols ] return join(unstacked..., on=rowKeys) end ```

I don't think it's a duplicate - I read that issue as wanting to pass multiple columns as `colKey`. Here I want to pass multiple columns to `value`, which is...

A nasty one I just come across is the `(//)` operator used in Fpath - it might need special treatment on top of this :(

To prove a point, both keys auth successfully to github with ConnectBot (e.g. like ssh -t)

I was just googling to see if it was possible to do this.. so +1 for your efforts. :)

Got hit by this with a simple `dotnet run` - I'm writing a CLI script that outputs some CSV. `dotnet run -- input.csv > output.csv` Uh oh, what's that up...

If we are ok with using npm 5, could use package-lock.json ? This does not force consumers to use npm 5, so should be fine as long as all contributors...