Subject: Re: [boost] AlRangeExandrescu?
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-07-27 07:12:51
on Sat Jul 25 2009, Thorsten Ottosen <thorsten.ottosen-AT-dezide.com> wrote:
> David Abrahams skrev:
>> on Fri Jul 24 2009, Thorsten Ottosen <thorsten.ottosen-AT-dezide.com> wrote:
>>> David Abrahams skrev:
>>>> Regardless, there could still be a single correct answer from the
>>>> standpoint of aesthetics, purity, and orthogonality. If
>>>> drop_front(find(range, x))
>>>> does the same thing as
>>>> find[_f+1,_e]( range, x )
>>>> then you don't need the complicated meta-goop in there.
> So how do we evaluate that aesthetics, purity and orthogonality
> of the two different approaches?
Lots of hard thinking.
> The find interface is one interface with goop, and the other
> alternative is now at least 5 different functions: find, until,
> before, drop_front, drop_back.
No, that's not a fair assessment. drop_front and drop_back are useful
on their own and in fact I think Andrei is already calling them
pop_front and pop_back(?)
So we're left with "find, until, and before." What's "before?"
>>> Then how would you safely implement
>>> find[_f-1,_e]( range, x );
>> At first glance, you can't. Is there a known use case for that? If not, it's moot.
> Who knows. Maybe you want the element before the found one to be there for some
"Maybe, for some reason" arguments don't hold much water with me,
especially in a library design context.
-- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk