From: JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z (joaquin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-01-20 14:35:31
----- Mensaje original -----
De: David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>
Fecha: Viernes, Enero 20, 2006 5:45 pm
Asunto: Re: [boost] [multi_index] intrusive multi_index poll for
> Bruno Martínez <br1_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 05:52:22 -0200, Joaquín Mª López Muñoz
> > <joaquin_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >> OK, you have shown a realistic scenario where the feature
> >> is valuable, so I'm putting this into my todo list --probably
> >> I can have it in time for 1.34, but I'm very slow writing and
> checking>> things :) Any suggestions about the name/syntax?
> Something like:
> >> iterator iter_to(const value_type& x)const;
> > iterator_from()?
> > I don't know. I'm spanish speaking too.
> position(const value_type& x) const;
position() would be a perfect fit except for one thing:
in the roadmapped ranked indices
I will need another member function to return the
position ordinal of a given element (that is,
the inverse of operator), and for that "position"
seems also a good candidate. If we could find some
other name for this latter memfunction,
I think I'd adopt "position" for the former.
> or if you are worried about "position" sounding like a verb,
> get_position(const value_type& x) const;
"position" seems OK to me as the verb interpretation
doesn't look so obvious, but then again I'm not a
native English speaker --incidentally, those who proposed
empty() for STL containers didn't seem to have their
English well oiled that day, either :)
Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk