# Should BigInteger's bigint.remove() be renamed?
**URL:** https://chapel.discourse.group/t/should-bigintegers-bigint-remove-be-renamed/8519
**Category:** Users
**Created:** [December 3, 2021, 7:04pm UTC](https://chapel.discourse.group/t/should-bigintegers-bigint-remove-be-renamed/8519 "2021-12-03T19:04:29Z")
**Posts on this page:** 2
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@tiger-yash](https://chapel.discourse.group/u/tiger-yash)
#### Post date: [December 3, 2021, 7:04pm UTC](https://chapel.discourse.group/t/should-bigintegers-bigint-remove-be-renamed/8519/1 "2021-12-03T19:04:29Z")
Hello,
I would like to rename the bigint.remove() function to bigint.removeFac() or bigint.removeFactor().
This function removes all instances of the factor ( `f` ) arg from the other arg ( `a` ), storing the result in `this` and returning the number of times the factor was removed.
I think the new name `removeFac / removeFactor` will be a lot more descriptive of its function and will also prevent any conflicts with other remove methods.
I need some developers or users to share their opinion on the same.
Thanks,
-Yash
---
### Author:  [@bradcray](https://chapel.discourse.group/u/bradcray)
#### Post date: [December 3, 2021, 7:31pm UTC](https://chapel.discourse.group/t/should-bigintegers-bigint-remove-be-renamed/8519/2 "2021-12-03T19:31:59Z")
Thanks for leading this discussion, Yash, and welcome to Chapel Discourse!
I like the idea of renaming the method, and personally prefer `removeFactor()` over `removeFac()`, for clarity and because it's not that much more typing. I'll be curious what others think and say as well, though.
[edit: Oh, I wanted to link the issue that backs this thread as well, for reference: [[Library Stabilization] Should we rename BigInteger's `bigint.remove()` method? · Issue #17732 · chapel-lang/chapel · GitHub](https://github.com/chapel-lang/chapel/issues/17732)]
-Brad