Rename coalesce() to fcoalesce()

[shrektan]

As @MichaelChirico metioned in #3740 (comment), we have 10 functions named with prefix f (some are no conflicts with base). However, coalesce() is an exception. I support @MichaelChirico 's idea that making the function names as consistent as possible.

So I think it may be better to rename the function coalesce() to fcoalesce() since it's not been published on CRAN yet.

Function	Conflict in base?
fintersect	✅
foverlaps	❌
frank{v}	✅
f{read,write}	❌
froll{mean,sum}	❌
fsetdiff	✅
fsetequal	✅
fsort	✅
funion	✅

[jangorecki]

Main factor for deciding names should be not overlapping to base R. Although I named frollmean to not overlap to zoo's function. Anyway my vote goes for keeping coalesce, overlapping shouldn't be very problematic here as both functions behaves quite the same. fcoalesce is not that obvious what it is.

[MichaelChirico]

@jangorecki just to push back a little, why cater frollmean not to overlap w zoo, but it's ok for coalesce to overlap with dplyr/hutils?

Not arguing strongly for fcoalesce (I'm kind of indifferent TBH), but rather think if we're going to close it would be best to have complete arguments laid out here to refer back to

[jangorecki]

• zoo::rollmean has different defaults than frollmean, (align arg) thus will yield different answer
• name of the function doesn't sound so artificial, "roll" from rolling, and "mean", adding "f" ("fast") prefix to this sounds more natural than adding to an artificial name "coalesce" which for me is just an SQL keyword not having any other meaning.
• this is rather personal opinion, but I found using data.table+zoo more common than data.table+dplyr

[jangorecki]

btw. there was discussion related to frollmean naming: https://github.com/orgs/Rdatatable/teams/project-members/discussions/5

[shrektan]

After a second thought, I think the current name is ok. Close this for now.

[mattdowle]

revdep testing #3581 reveals the wrinkle.

Exporting coalesce causes warnings in revdeps grattan, mlr, OpenML, vosonSML, at least.

The warning (just because it's any warning) would need to be resolved by communication with those maintainers. But more significantly, those packages may start to use our new coalesce; we would inflict it on them without them asking. That inflict happens for mlr and OpenML but not grattan or vosonSML; I guess the difference is the order they import the packages. One bug in our coalesce revealed by mlr (#3826) in revdep testing because of a difference between our coalesce and BBmisc::coalesce. So it was good to call it coalesce otherwise we wouldn't have found that. But we shouldn't force the new function on them, until a few years have passed anyway. (Aside: dplyr::coalesce returns the same type error we did in that coalesce(NULL,"foo") example, I'd say dplyr::coalesce needs to fix that too).

The case for changing to fcoalesce seems clear then. We can still optimize coalesce inside DT[...] to use fcoalesce and we can export fcoalesce too.

Warning: replacing previous import 'data.table::coalesce' by 'hutils::coalesce' when loading 'grattan' 
Warning: replacing previous import ‘BBmisc::coalesce’ by ‘data.table::coalesce’ when loading ‘mlr’
Warning: replacing previous import ‘BBmisc::coalesce’ by ‘data.table::coalesce’ when loading ‘OpenML’
Warning: replacing previous import ‘data.table::coalesce’ by ‘dplyr::coalesce’ when loading ‘vosonSML’