Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost.Range] An issue with the documentation of 'remove_erase_if' algorithm
From: Adam Romanek (romanek.adam_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-02-07 15:15:01


On 02/07/2013 04:38 PM, Neil Groves wrote:
>> Check the documentation of "remove_erase" algorithm. It says:
>>
>> "(...) This is in contrast to the *remove* algorithm which merely
>> rearranges elements. (...)"
>>
>>
> Thanks for this report it is true that this one is incorrect. This was not
> what your original email contained. You posted a snippet from the correct
> example. You also explicitly stated: "I believe it's not in contrast to the
> "erase" algorithm but rather the "remove" algorithm.". You didn't highlight
> that remove_erase_if was inconsistent to remove_erase. From what was
> presented the most likely explanation was that you had a fairly common
> mis-aprehension to many others about the std::erase algorithm. I'm
> delighted that this is not the case, but please don't take offence.
>
>

Sorry for this misunderstanding. To me, my intent was clear, but it
seems that the words were not chosen right.

>> On the other hand, the documentation of "remove_erase_if" algorithm says:
>>
>> "(...) This is in contrast to the *erase* algorithm which merely
>> rearranges elements. (...)"
>>
>> Can you see the difference?
>>
>>
> I can see the defect now that the relevant section has been highlighted. I
> understand that you meant that the documentation for remove_erase is
> incorrect rather than remove_erase_if. I shall correct this for the next
> release.

As others have already pointed out the problem lays in the documentation
of 'remove_erase_if' algorithm.

>
>> WBR,
>> Adam Romanek
>>
>>
> Thanks for the report,
> Neil Groves

I'm glad I could help.

WBR,
Adam Romanek


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk