• Denis Koroskin <2korden gmail.com> Jan 29 2009
• Chad J <gamerchad __spam.is.bad__gmail.com> Jan 29 2009
• Daniel Keep <daniel.keep.lists gmail.com> Jan 29 2009
• "Joel C. Salomon" <joelcsalomon gmail.com> Jan 30 2009

Denis Koroskin <2korden gmail.com> writes:

Vladimir Panteleev Wrote:

 On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:25:58 +0200, Andrei Alexandrescu  
 <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:
 
 Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 So please let's vote once and for all.

 Andrei


 place.
  -- Simen


 Ok, after looking at my code I discovered a huge problem with "first".  
 ("Last" is cool.) If all you do is implement them and use them with  
 foreach, fine. But if you need to call them manually (which is the case  
 sometimes), you get really badly interacting terms there. Look at this,  
 taken from real code (the filter function):

 while (!_input.empty && !pred(_input.first)) _input.next;

 I can see the putative user scratching their head: "Ok, so I start  
 iteration with the first element, then I move to the next one... but  
 then why the heck am I looking at the first again?"

 "First" must go.


 I don't think that "next" is an appropriate name here. Since it is an  
 action, it should be named as one - "next" sounds more like a function  
 (which doesn't modify the instance). Have you considered "forward"?
 
 -- 
 Best regards,
   Vladimir                          mailto:thecybershadow gmail.com


Agree, "advance" would be a better name, though (imo).

Chad J <gamerchad __spam.is.bad__gmail.com> writes:

Denis Koroskin wrote:
 Vladimir Panteleev Wrote:
 
 On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:25:58 +0200, Andrei Alexandrescu  
 <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> wrote:

 Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 So please let's vote once and for all.

 Andrei


 place.
  -- Simen


 ("Last" is cool.) If all you do is implement them and use them with  
 foreach, fine. But if you need to call them manually (which is the case  
 sometimes), you get really badly interacting terms there. Look at this,  
 taken from real code (the filter function):

 while (!_input.empty && !pred(_input.first)) _input.next;

 I can see the putative user scratching their head: "Ok, so I start  
 iteration with the first element, then I move to the next one... but  
 then why the heck am I looking at the first again?"

 "First" must go.


 action, it should be named as one - "next" sounds more like a function  
 (which doesn't modify the instance). Have you considered "forward"?

 -- 
 Best regards,
   Vladimir                          mailto:thecybershadow gmail.com


 Agree, "advance" would be a better name, though (imo).


Same, it seems BETTER.  Though, it seems like it's suboptimal as well.
As I understand it we aren't so much moving rightward a head that's
reading a tape, but instead we are incrementally chopping off the
leftmost elements until none are left.  So it is possible (though not
intuitive) to draw analogies and write metaphors:  we are advancing our
knife each time we chop off a bit of carrot.

Anyways, while technically incorrect as far as I can tell, it isn't
aesthetically displeasing to me, so in some odd way I am alright with
next.

Hmmm... maybe "chop" is a good word for this...

- Chad

Daniel Keep <daniel.keep.lists gmail.com> writes:

Chad J wrote:
 Denis Koroskin wrote:
 Agree, "advance" would be a better name, though (imo).


 Same, it seems BETTER.  Though, it seems like it's suboptimal as well.
 As I understand it we aren't so much moving rightward a head that's
 reading a tape, but instead we are incrementally chopping off the
 leftmost elements until none are left.  So it is possible (though not
 intuitive) to draw analogies and write metaphors:  we are advancing our
 knife each time we chop off a bit of carrot.
 
 Anyways, while technically incorrect as far as I can tell, it isn't
 aesthetically displeasing to me, so in some odd way I am alright with
 next.
 
 Hmmm... maybe "chop" is a good word for this...
 
 - Chad


That's why I suggested "advanceFront" and "retreatBack."  I don't think
there's a single, short word to exactly express the concept "move the
front of a view of some sequence one element towards the end."

  -- Daniel

"Joel C. Salomon" <joelcsalomon gmail.com> writes:

Chad J wrote:
 As I understand it we aren't so much moving rightward a head that's
 reading a tape, but instead we are incrementally chopping off the
 leftmost elements until none are left.  So it is possible (though not
 intuitive) to draw analogies and write metaphors:  we are advancing our=


 knife each time we chop off a bit of carrot.


 Hmmm... maybe "chop" is a good word for this...


How about =93chomp=94 and =93regurgitate=94? ;)