Re: [boost] [range][rangex] Joining two unrelated ranges?

Subject: Re: [boost] [range][rangex] Joining two unrelated ranges?
From: Neil Groves (neil_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-24 03:53:52

A small comment inviting new discussion on RangeEx naming is inline:

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 1:52 AM, Joel de Guzman
<joel_at_[hidden]>wrote:

> Mathias Gaunard wrote:
>
>> Joel de Guzman wrote:
>>
>>  In Fusion (and also in MPL), it's called joint_view:
>>>
>>>    http://tinyurl.com/ljrezn
>>>
>>> and there's the fusion::join algo:
>>>
>>>    http://tinyurl.com/mxo2rf
>>>
>>> If anyone writes such a thing (I'm surprised RangeEx does not have it),
>>> please follow MPL/Fusion's lead.
>>>
>>
>> I'm not sure an agreement was reached during review as to what naming to
>> use for "lazy" range operations.
>>
>> According to the initial naming convention RangeEx used, it would be
>> called "joined" and not "join_view".
>>
>
> Sigh, yeah, I recall the review. I'll just hope the people involved
> will value precedence and consistency.
>

If there was something about the review that you did not like, could we
please attend to it by finding useful actions? I'm more than happy to
evaluate/accomodate everyone's input. There was not much discussion IIRC
when I discussed using join_view, join, or joined. I am concerned that the
tone of the comment indicates a broader dissatisfaction. I would be happy to
discuss specific points and attempt to resolved any issues you may have.

>
>
> Regards,
> --
> Joel de Guzman
>

Best Wishes,
Neil Groves