Closed Philippe-Cholet closed 4 months ago
Nope, no objections to me! Being consistent is good.
(Feel free to rename however you think is best. Could also consider reduce_tree
or something for improved sorting, though it doesn't read quite as nicely so up to you.)
I'm okay with both. @jswrenn Feel free to merge or ask me to change the name.
Let's stick with tree_reduce
. We don't have any other reduce*
methods, so sorting doesn't matter too much for us. If the standard library decides to stabilize such a method, the libs team might want to revisit the name.
I think
tree_fold1
should have been deprecated fortree_reduce
at the same timefold1
was deprecated forreduce
.With this deprecation, we will be able to remove
tree_fold1
andfold1
at the same time and close that chapter once and for all.@scottmcm Do you have an objection on this?
PS: I wish I had thought of this but no, thanks reddit.