Re: [boost] [boost.range] renaming empty() to is_empty()

From: John Torjo (john.lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-05 08:29:00

Jonathan Wakely wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 10:16:39AM +0200, Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> 
> 
>>Dear all,
>>
>>John Torjo asks why don't rename the Range concepts empty() function to the more idiomatic and less embarrassing
>>name is_empty()?
>>
>>My initial thoughts were if this could ceate more confusion, but I'm beginning to think John is right.
>>
>>So if people would cast some yes or no votes it would be great.
> 
> 
> Hmm ... the function takes its argument by const-reference, so it's
> "obvious" it doesn't empty the range if you've seen the function
> declaration. (But anything "obvious" will fail to be obvious to
> some people).
> 
> Although it would be nice if the STL had used is_empty() it's too late
> to change that now, and Boost's web site does say:
> 
>   The emphasis is on libraries which work well with the C++ Standard
>   Library.

And how would range lib not work well with STL from this point of view?

> 
> I think consistency with the existing name is important.
> 

I'm all for consistency myself, but keeping up a bad standard, while 
many experts say the name is wrong, is just perpetuating bad practice.

Best,
John

-- 
John Torjo
Freelancer
-- john_at_[hidden]
Contributing editor, C/C++ Users Journal
-- "Win32 GUI Generics" -- generics & GUI do mix, after all
-- http://www.torjo.com/win32gui/
-- v1.3beta released - check out splitter/simple_viewer,
    a File Explorer/Viewer all in about 200 lines of code!
Professional Logging Solution for FREE
-- http://www.torjo.com/code/logging.zip (logging           - C++)
-- http://www.torjo.com/logview/         (viewing/filtering - Win32)
-- http://www.torjo.com/logbreak/        (debugging         - Win32)