Re: [boost] Formal Review: Boost.RangeEx - missing algorithms

Subject: Re: [boost] Formal Review: Boost.RangeEx - missing algorithms
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-02-23 17:43:45

on Sun Feb 22 2009, Neil Groves <neil-AT-grovescomputing.com> wrote:

>> I was wondering if the following SGI algorithms should't be included in the
>> library.
>>
>> count_if
>> search_n
>> copy_n
>> fill_n
>> generate_n
>> remove_copy
>> remove_copy_if
>> unique_copy
>> reverse_copy
>> rotate_copy
>> random_shuffle
>> random_sample
>> random_sample_n
>> partial_sort_copy
>> is_sorted
>> is_heap
>>
>
> Many of these are deliberately missing, although I am inviting comments
> about this design decision. The rationale for ot including the _n and _if
> versions is covered under the adaptor documentation. It is probably
> necessary to add an obvious link in the algorithm section. The algorithm
> section is where people are going to go to find out about the algorithms I
> suppose! Ooops!

If I were you, I'd take a careful look at what's in the Adobe Source
Library.  Alex Stepanov &co. spent years researching the essential
elements of this domain, and his idea of what's important may have
evolved quite a bit since he was at SGI.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com