core: Add fs-basename function

[danielbayley]

# ~/path/to/file.ys
filename:: fs-basename(FILE) # file.ys
basename:: fs-basename(FILE "ys") # file

[ingydotnet]

Hi. Thanks for trying out YS and thanks for the PR.
Love collaboration!

I'm not entirely opposed to this, but these already work:

$ ys -pe "fs-filename('$PWD/ReadMe.md')"
"ReadMe.md"
$ ys -pe "fs-filename('$PWD/ReadMe.md').replace('.md')"
"ReadMe"

Tell me a bit why you'd prefer this if you don't mind.

[ingydotnet]

@danielbayley I added a couple commits to your work here https://github.com/yaml/yamlscript/tree/fs-basename

Let me know what you think.

[danielbayley]

Tell me a bit why you'd prefer this if you don't mind.

@ingydotnet Sure, so I was going on the Ruby basename method, which has an optional second param to remove the given extension, or more usefully, has the ability to remove any extension with a basic glob:

# ~/path/to/file.ys
fs-basename(FILE ".*") # file

these already work:

$ ys -pe "fs-filename('$PWD/ReadMe.md').replace('.md')"
"ReadMe"

As does this:

fs-filename(FILE):fs/strip-ext

But it’s still 2 methods, rather than one. If I’m going to mix code directly into my data, I want it to be as terse as possible (without losing legibility).

Also on that note, how come fs/strip-ext, and fs/split-ext are not aliased to fs-stripext/fs-splitext respectively, and included with the other fs-* methods, as listed here?

I also thought about adding this second param to the existing fs-filename method, and/or just having fs-basename as a straight up alias to that…

What do you think? @ingydotnet

Further reading on this: babashka/fs#28, and babashka/fs#29.

[ingydotnet]

If I’m going to mix code directly into my data, I want it to be as terse as possible (without losing legibility).

We have shared goals there!!

I'll look it all over in a bit and push some commits for you to review

[ingydotnet]

We don't need to alias fs/split-ext because we can just use that directly, no?

$ ys -pe "fs-filename('$PWD/ReadMe.md'):fs/split-ext"
["ReadMe" "md"]

[ingydotnet]

I'll add support for

fs-basename(FILE '*')

note that fs/strip-ext doesn't use a . in the ext.

[danielbayley]

We don't need to alias fs/split-ext because we can just use that directly, no?

Well yes, but then why alias some and not others? I’m just thinking about consistency is all…

[ingydotnet]

We don't need to alias fs/split-ext because we can just use that directly, no?

Well yes, but then why alias some and not others? I’m just thinking about consistency is all…

afaict, none of std/fs-foobar match fs/foobar exactly.

Some are close like fs-filename because I prefer filename to file-name.

[ingydotnet]

Pushed 14a53e6 to devel branch.