[boost] Re: string algorithms review

From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-18 21:15:47

"Daniel Frey" <daniel.frey_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:bmrejk$uas$1_at_sea.gmane.org...
-Pavol Droba wrote:
>>* The default should be copying algorithms, not modifying algorithms!
>
> In the beginning of the library implementation, the copy versions were
default.
> However, than there was a discussion on the list and people demanded, that
> the default should be inplace.
>
> I don't remember the exact reasons now, but one of them was the similarity
> to the STL. Algorithms there are using the same convention (i.e. copy
variant has suffix).
>
> I don't have any strong preference for either of conventions. But naming
is very
> subjective matter, so I would like to hear more votes for the change
before I'll
> go and do something.

-Of course. I would still vote "yes" if the mayority decides that the
-current default is the prefered one..

I think it would be wrong to change something just because of votes. If it
should be changed, then let it be because
there are compelling reasons for it. So far, we have one reason that it
should stay the way it is

1) similarity with std algorithms

Personally I also think it reads more clearly:

    trim( s ); // a bit like s.trim();

would you really expect a verb in the imperative not to change input (or
object-) state?

regards

-Thorsten