From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-05-06 05:15:56
Thorsten Ottosen writes:
> "Aleksey Gurtovoy" <agurtovoy_at_[hidden]> wrote in message news:073d01c43295$1d7354b0$6401a8c0_at_metacomm.com...
> | Pavol Droba writes:
> | > You are not quite right. Sequence concept is precisely defined in C++ standard.
> | Yes, and that's unfortunate, because it is essentially a dead concept -- "nobody"
> | writes generic code that relies on it -- that has occupied a good name. In fact,
> | "Collection" is exactly the word that would perfectly fit to describe what the
> | standard choose to refer to as "Sequence". I don't think going the other way
> | around would be a good call.
> what would you use for sequence then?
Well, I don't have an ultimate answer, but here's a couple of candidates:
> | In CS terminology, collections are inherently
> | associated with storage;
> can give any examples of this CS terminology?
-- Aleksey Gurtovoy MetaCommunications Engineering
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk