So this is the current behaviour of the filter function, when given a function that returns a boolean and a collection (taken from the documentation): julia> a = 1:10 1:10 julia> filter(isodd, a) 5-element Array{Int64,1}: 1 3 5 7 9 I would argue that this is counter-inntuitive, at least to m…

This change would be massively breaking and contrary to every other programming language with a filter function, but in no way improve the functional power of the function. No, this will not be considered.

The filter function is non-intuitive

Internals & Design

pfitzseb August 28, 2020, 11:32am 5

Also, fwiw, all filter implementations I’ve ever seen work this way and return an array/iterable with elements for which the predicate returns true.

3 Likes

Topic		Replies	Views
Why no single argument `filter!(f::Function)` or `Iterators.filter(f::Function)`? Internals & Design	20	892	October 19, 2025
Why not filt, filter as filter? General Usage	5	1103	June 24, 2017
Why does "filter" use an uncommon position for the input dataframe? General Usage dataframes	9	482	November 5, 2021
Function chaining with \|> and filter function General Usage question , piping	5	3727	November 1, 2018
Why no single argument `filter(f::function)`? Internals & Design	8	660	January 21, 2023

The filter function is non-intuitive

Related topics