Re: [Boost-users] Formal Review: Boost.RangeEx

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Formal Review: Boost.RangeEx
From: Alan M. Carroll (amc_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-03-03 11:06:47

I agree with this as well.

At 04:23 PM 3/2/2009, you wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 12:28
> PM, Thorsten Ottosen
> <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
> - What is your evaluation of the design?
>
>
> The 'ed naming is not good, and for consistency across Boost the
> _view
> naming should be used.
>
> However, in my mind map each of the adaptors is a verb rather than a
> noun, so
> the expression should read as
>
> rng | sort | unique
>
> rather than
>
> rng | sort_view | unique_view
>
> Whereas when the function invocation syntax is used the _view naming
> seems to
> express the intent more clearly. ie
>
> unique_view( sort_view( rng ) )