Stringy

Stringy copied to clipboard

Hello @danielstjules,

Your library is really great! I'm using it in several projects and it is a must-have swiss knife.

Here's what I suggest for improving it:

1. On the next major version, rename your package to stringy/stringy. No problem with your username, but I always have to go on github to check the vendor name.

2. The split() method is very useful, but a join() factory (to do the inverse thing, join an array of Stringy objects) would also be really helpful

3. Please merge SubStringy methods into the main library. The substring methods are extremely useful (and we expect them when using a string maniuplation library) but the use of a "plugin", which is actually an override requiring to refactor each existing import, is a real pain.

I have made my own fork which integrates these 3 suggestions: https://github.com/bpolaszek/Stringy (I didn't registered it on packagist to let you submit the stringy/stringy package if you agree with my 1st point). That's what I use in my projects now, and things are way simpler.

What do you think?

• Package renaming sounds fine, probably easier to remember as you said
• Join sounds good 👍
• I don't think SubStringy belongs in the core, and could probably be implemented as a Trait if you wanted a bit more flexibility :) https://github.com/TCB13/SubStringy/issues/1 https://github.com/danielstjules/Stringy/pull/87#issuecomment-98786982

@bpolaszek I had this SubStringy discussion previously with @danielstjules - the first versions were actually a PR to this repo. There are also other "extensions" that follow this principle.

We're currently in the process of making SubStringy into a trait.

@bpolaszek @danielstjules TCB13/SubStringy is now a trait.

Hello @danielstjules @TCB13,

Alright! My 3rd point was about the fact that "substringing" is very common when manipulating strings, that's why I expected these methods to be merged in the main library, allowing the use an out-of-the-box swiss knife, requiring no config and no overriding.

But I understand your point, and the use of a trait is indeed a better approach that a vertical inheritance.

Do you want me to do a PR for points 1 & 2?

Thank you, Ben

@TCB13 Awesome! :)

Alright! My 3rd point was about the fact that "substringing" is very common when manipulating strings, that's why I expected these methods to be merged in the main library, allowing the use an out-of-the-box swiss knife, requiring no config and no overriding.

I definitely think the package is useful, I just think it's hard to come up with terse method names that describe their behaviour. For example:

s('What are your plans today?')->substringAfterFirst('plans ');
// => "today"

// An equivalent using only core methods
s('What are your plans today?')->split('plans ')[1] ?: false

substringCount
// same as countSubstr in Stringy core

// Some of the other methods require a bit more aerobatics with just core,
// so I can see their benefit :)

The core library def has quite a few "substring" methods already :) But I think traits are the right way to go, letting people easily customize at will!

@danielstjules An equivalent using only core methods those methods are hard on the eyes. This is one of the reasons why I added the substring methods. Easier to use specially when you use an IDE / sublime.

@TCB13 Agreed! Building off the core methods can get verbose too for some of those operations as the array primitives in PHP aren't great. Definitely appreciate the library :)