From: David Bergman (davidb_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-31 00:28:00
Uh, "heterogeneity in the values"? Are not all sets either singleton or
"heterogeneous in values". Or, did you mean something else?
It seems like we are converging to "enum_set"...
[mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Fernando Cacciola
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 4:59 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] Re: set class
----- Original Message -----
From: "David B. Held" <dheld_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 5:38 PM
Subject: [boost] Re: set class
> "Fernando Cacciola" <fcacciola_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> > "Greg Colvin" <Gregory.Colvin_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> > news:184.108.40.206.2.20020830130145.02a48df0_at_rgmgitmail.oraclecorp.com...
> > > I vote for "bag".
> > >
> > Gee! You've just took it out of my mouth! :-)
> You had a bag in your mouth? How odd. ;)
>Seriously, though, when I
> see 'bag', I read 'heterogenous container', not 'set'. Anyone else
>have that problem?
I also think of it as an heterogeneous container, but I see the
heterogeneity in the values and not in the types. In fact, I even think
that in this particular structure -or the structure I'm thinking of- the
type of the elements is not important -or at least conceptually not
important-. That's why they can be coded more or less freely. In this
view, I see it as a container of different *things*, were these things
are essentially attributed with value but not with type (IOWs, their
type required by the language rules are an implementation detail from
the user POV, even if the user is required to specify it because the
language says so)
Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk