Re: Reverse SCAN SPLIT

On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 8:28:26 +0000, albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl wrote:

In article <nnd$231969a2$24a04042@87f25e33f755b9dd>,

[..]

Compare to what I'm doing. Promoting the actual API specification
so that you can decide whether you want to actually use it.
>
   $/
>
>
  STACKEFFECT: sc c --- sc1 sc2
>
  DESCRIPTION: []
>
  Find the first c in the string constant sc and split it at that
  address. Return the strings after and before c into sc1 and sc2
  respectively. If the character is not present sc1 is a null string
  (its address is zero) and sc2 is the original string. Both sc1 and
  sc2 may be empty strings (i.e. their count is zero), if c is the
  last or first character in sc .

Wil Baden chose to keep c in sc2. Do you have a reason to
remove it?
It seems logical to remove it. I normally use lots of
`1 /STRING' and `-LEADING' or `-TRAILING' sequences in further
processing of Split-At-Char results, but not always.
Maybe because an empty sc2 is less informative than an sc2 of
size 1?
-marcel