From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-26 08:30:02
> ierase_nth_copy( s, "s", 1 );
> this does not erase the 1st copy of "s", but the second. What's the
> rationale for this? I don't find it intuitive.
there is another thing which I forgot to mention.All the
XXX_first functions seems not to be needed since I can just write
XXX_nth( s, 1 ); This constitutes quite a few functions that can be removed
from the interface. Does anybody else
feels that this is the right to do?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk