[erlang-questions] Any reason not to have a string:replace?
Tue Apr 8 18:29:30 CEST 2014
Because it's convenient to have string:replace that does the simple
thing one expects of it.
> Why not use re:replace/3,4?
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 10:52 AM, David Welton <>
>> It would be convenient to have something like binary:replace, but for
>> I'd be happy to try to put together a pull request that does this,
>> although I'd likely need some help with the finer points of what
>> options to add.
David N. Welton
More information about the erlang-questions