Re: [boost] Re: Algorithms and Formal Reviews

From: Mark D Rintoul (rintoul_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-01-18 13:02:08

Hartmut Kaiser wrote:
> 
> The idea to extend the goal of boost to provide more algorithms supports one
> of the central ideas of the STL: to make it possible to develop new
> containers for stl-algorithms _and_ new algorithms for stl containers (or
> both).
> 
>  [nice little algorithms cut out]
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Stephen Cleary [mailto:shammah_at_[hidden]]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 7:48 AM
> > To: boost_at_[hidden]
> > Subject: [boost] Re: Algorithms and Formal Reviews
> >
> >
> > --- In boost_at_[hidden], "John E. Potter" <jpotter_at_f...> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 10 Jan 2001, Beman Dawes wrote:
> > >
> > > > I've been thinking about sequence algorithms because of several
> > recent
> > > > boost postings, and string algorithms because I've seen several
> > nice onces
> > > > recently.
> >
> > > How about algorithms templated on containers?  That would open the
> > > door for many different ideas.  Much different from the stl style.
> >
> > No reason why we couldn't have our own algorithms library.  I like
> > the idea.  copy_if could be a prospective member, too.
> >

        I think this is a great direction for boost.  Perhaps a detailed
algorithmic analysis of what sort of constructions can and cannot be
done 
using existing STL algorithms, and how one might create a fundamental
base of algorithms which filled all of the holes.  I personally have
found the
for_each/transform family of algorithms lacking all of the necessary
members.  There are many fundamental loop structures that could be
nicely done if there were a for_each_if and a transform_if, and also
a two member for_each function (akin to the two member transform).

        Danny

-- 
------------------
Mark D. (Danny) Rintoul, Dept. 9235
Computational Biology & Materials Technology
Sandia National Laboratories
Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone]
email: rintoul_at_[hidden]
------------------