[foreign-memaccess] [Rev 01] RFR: Add MemorySegment::fill

[Maurizio Cimadamore]

On 14/05/2020 21:50, John R Rose wrote:
> If a MS has a utility method for sending data somewhere else, it shouldn't
> be called `copy` but rather `copyRange` (as in ju.Arrays) or `copyOut`
> or `copyTo`.  I have a very mild preference for `copyFrom` for the normal
> polarity of a copy, which copies into the receiver, but that would tend to
> drag in `fillFrom` or `fillWith`, which looks like overkill.

Agree - in my comment I think I specifically used `copyTo` and the 
argument was the destination. `copy` becomes ambiguous if we use the 
instance method style. `copyRange` seems similarly ambiguous. So, for me 
it's either `copyFrom` (receiver is the destination) or `copyTo` 
(receiver is the thing you want to copy onto the other segment).

I'm not too worried that other methods don't have suffixes, since they 
are not ambiguous. Consistency is important, but I think it's one aspect 
of the decision. The most important aspect is how readable the code is. 
And I think we have made some strides in this discussion to make some 
improvements on that front.