Re: [boost] Re: Re: Re: algorithms namespace

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-19 08:06:37

Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> "Pavol Droba" <droba_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> news:20040219074546.GF11201_at_lenin.felcer.sk...
> [ambiguity not an issue]
>> Please give me an example of an algorithm, that can be threated
> differently
>> for strings and for containers. If there would be something like
>> that (I don't see any), than is would make sense to use different
>> names, rather then just
>> different namespace. Otherwise, a user can get quite confused.
>
> The problem arise if there is, let's say, four versions of a
> particular algorithm.
> Two works on iterators and two works on containers and there might be
> other arguments too. It certainly clashes in
> the container algos so that we can't have unqualified calls but must
> use boost::XX and std::XX.

I'm with Pavol here. One useful guideline is: "Do not overload a function if
you care which overload would be called." In other words, functions with the
same name should - roughly - have the same effect. They may differ in
efficiency, const correctness, and so on, but the general effect should be
the same.

In other words, if I write replace(s, x, y), it should always replace all
occurences of x in s with y and return the result (for example), no matter
whether it's std::replace, str::replace, or cnt::replace.

This is a guideline, not a rule. You can break it if you think the end
result would be better without it. But if followed, it leads to code that is
more readable and less error-prone.