# V0.6: isalpha (and similar) deprecation warning for arrays of (Sub)Strings
**URL:** https://discourse.julialang.org/t/v0-6-isalpha-and-similar-deprecation-warning-for-arrays-of-sub-strings/2623
**Category:** General Usage
**Tags:** question, proposal
**Created:** [March 12, 2017, 3:21pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/v0-6-isalpha-and-similar-deprecation-warning-for-arrays-of-sub-strings/2623 "2017-03-12T15:21:30Z")
**Posts on this page:** 3
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@SaschaMann](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/SaschaMann)
#### Post date: [March 12, 2017, 3:21pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/v0-6-isalpha-and-similar-deprecation-warning-for-arrays-of-sub-strings/2623/1 "2017-03-12T15:21:30Z")
The following code results in a deprecation warning telling one to use `all(isalpha, s)` instead of `isalpha(s)`:
```julia
julia> s = ["abc", "def", "ghi"]
3-element Array{String,1}:
"abc"
"def"
"ghi"
julia> all(isalpha, s)
WARNING: isalpha(s::AbstractString) is deprecated, use all(isalpha, s) instead.
Stacktrace:
[1] depwarn(::String, ::Symbol) at ./deprecated.jl:64
[2] isalpha(::String) at ./deprecated.jl:51
[3] all(::Base.UTF8proc.#isalpha, ::Array{String,1}) at ./reduce.jl:595
[4] eval(::Module, ::Any) at ./boot.jl:235
[5] eval_user_input(::Any, ::Base.REPL.REPLBackend) at ./REPL.jl:66
[6] macro expansion at ./REPL.jl:97 [inlined]
[7] (::Base.REPL.##1#2{Base.REPL.REPLBackend})() at ./event.jl:73
while loading no file, in expression starting on line 0
true
```
`isalpha` is called for every element of `s`, so it calls `isalpha(::AbstractString)` which rightfully results in a warning.
However, the warning itself is misleading imo, because `all(isalpha, s)` is already called and doesn’t explain the proper way to do this. It behaves the same for similar functions such as `isdigit`.
A working solution would be
```julia
julia> all(all(isalpha, x) for x in s)
true
```
Although I’m not sure if this is the best/most performant solution. Is there a better way to achieve this?
Not sure if this is a bug and belongs on the GitHub issue tracker instead. Imo there should be a different deprecation warning for `all(isalpha, s::Array{AbstractString, 1})` that actually explains how to fix it.
* * *
```julia
julia> versioninfo()
Julia Version 0.6.0-pre.alpha.126
Commit 0615ea2b07* (2017-03-12 13:00 UTC)
Platform Info:
OS: Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-5200U CPU @ 2.20GHz
WORD_SIZE: 64
BLAS: libopenblas (USE64BITINT DYNAMIC_ARCH NO_AFFINITY Haswell)
LAPACK: libopenblas64_
LIBM: libopenlibm
LLVM: libLLVM-3.9.1 (ORCJIT, broadwell)
```
---
### Author:  [@yuyichao](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/yuyichao)
#### Post date: [March 12, 2017, 3:31pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/v0-6-isalpha-and-similar-deprecation-warning-for-arrays-of-sub-strings/2623/2 "2017-03-12T15:31:04Z")
What the depwarn suggests is `all(x->all(isalpha, x), s)`. I think it’s very hard for the depwarn to suggest anything better in this case without creating confusing in other cases. (e.g. suggesting replacing `isalpha(s::AbstractString)` with `(x->all(isalpha, x))(s)` can be more general but is unlikely helpful). The signature printed should help resolving the confusing though.
---
### Author:  [@SaschaMann](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/SaschaMann)
#### Post date: [March 12, 2017, 3:41pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/v0-6-isalpha-and-similar-deprecation-warning-for-arrays-of-sub-strings/2623/3 "2017-03-12T15:41:03Z")
That’s a better solution than the for-loop. Thanks for the quick response & explanation! 🙂