Do you guys know if there's any particular reason ...

# stdlib

[LeoColman]

Do you guys know if there's any particular reason for Char.isDigit to not have it's opposite Char.isNotDigit?

[snowe]

I'll go ahead and add this to the kotlin-extensions library

[LeoColman]

Great, Tyler!

[LeoColman]

Still worth to understand why it's not in stdlib

[ilya.gorbunov]

Do you imply that every is*-function should have isNot* counterpart, as if there was no ! (not) operator?

[LeoColman]

That's what I thought, yes

[LeoColman]

Unless it's confusing (for instance, if there's an OR in the function)

[LeoColman]

We see that for many operations, such as String.isBlank, String.isEmpty,

[LeoColman]

List.isEmpty, Sequence

[ilya.gorbunov]

Yes there are shortcuts for some common cases, but for others not operator is pretty enough

[LeoColman]

I mean, the not operator is always enough... But perhaps it's more expressive to use the not in the function

[LeoColman]

And it's way too overkill to implement an extension function for that

[LeoColman]

Is it harmful or unclear in any way? For the Char.isNotDigit example?

[ilya.gorbunov]

It's not unclear but rather redundant in presence of the operator.