From: joel de guzman (djowel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-04-14 19:57:16
----- Original Message -----
From: "Aleksey Gurtovoy" :
> > I like this one a lot, Aleksey! It looks a lot like the fold that I
> > am accustomed to. In fact I was almost about to post something
> > like this but hesitated. Can we do it this way?
> Yes, the above is a perfectly working implementation of 'count_if' - on a
> reasonably conforming compiler.
> > If so, why did we bother with the long one?
> It's how the algorithm implemented by the library itself.
I think that effort must concentrate more on:
1) using map and fold instead of iterators to implement algorithms.
In most FP languages I know, these higher order functions are
the most used all over the place.
2) the porting of fold and map (is there a map?) to less conformant
3) OK, just my personal wish: Use more FP sounding names. This is
all about FP, no more, no less. Pattern matching, recursion,
higher order functions, fold, map, curry, lambda, the list goes on...
Clearly, the STL authors are knowledgable with FP. STL is a good
start in introducing FP (stealthily) to the C++ programmer. It is
my opinion that we should extend that further. Why do we seem to
underestimate the C++ programmer. C++ programmers are the
**BEST* in the world (Period :-).
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk