
Boost : 
From: Rob Stewart (stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 20050810 16:45:27
From: Florian Stegner <FlSt_at_[hidden]>
> Rob Stewart wrote:
> >From: Florian Stegner <FlSt_at_[hidden]>
> >>Rob Stewart wrote:
> >>>From: Matthew Vogt <mattvogt_at_[hidden]>
> >>>>Matthew Vogt wrote:
> >
> I will try to summarize all types of multivalues:
>
> any_of ( s ) <PRED> x > is true if one or more elements of s satisfy
> the test "element <PRED> x"
Yes.
> all_of( s ) <PRED> x > is true all elements of s satisfy the test
> "element <PRED> x"
Yes.
> none_of( s ) <PRED> x > negation of any_of( a ): is false if one ore
> more elements of s satisfy[...]
Yes.
> ???_of( s ) <PRED> x> negation of all_of( a ) ( in my implementation
> not_all_of( a ) ): is false if all elements of s satisfy[...]. This is
Yes.
> still missing in your implementation. Your implementation of not_all is
> the negation of any_of.
I think it was a copy and paste error.
> one_of( s ) <PRED> x > is true if exact one element of s statisfy[...]
Yes.
> n_of( n, s ) <PRED> x > is true if exact n elements of s satisfy[...]
Yes.
> some_of( n, m, s ) <PRED> x > is true if more than n and less than m+1
> elements of s satisfy[...]
I don't agree. Why the strange treatment of the two limits? We
need to decide whether the count is inclusive, exclusive, or both
(left inclusive, right exclusive). My assumption has been
inclusive for both values.
> From your description of each_of: Your implementation of all_of() is
> correct. I'm right? And each_of needs to refactored?
My all_of implementation was correct. I think we can eliminate
each_of.
 Rob Stewart stewart_at_[hidden] Software Engineer http://www.sig.com Susquehanna International Group, LLP using std::disclaimer;
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk