220 7199 article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9my_Lefevre?= Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Re: "count_while" and "count_until" algorithms Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 23:59:05 +0200 Lines: 131 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <2602b3fd-fccd-459b-be1a-93a12005dc5c@isocpp.org> <231e6ef1-599d-4877-be6c-55e85e5a4e41@isocpp.org> <6e15fc38-8be3-4e74-ade9-e25a8d0e0509@isocpp.org> <2d16db0e-fb46-4e1f-956f-db3407a6fb4c@isocpp.org> <1381268094.9101.48.camel@sara> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b66f599f9b70904e841e23b X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1381269591 24372 80.91.229.3 (8 Oct 2013 21:59:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 21:59:51 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCN7B34JVEARBUMA2KJAKGQELRQEVNI@isocpp.org Tue Oct 08 23:59:54 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-we0-f197.google.com ([74.125.82.197]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VTfJj-00078M-64 for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 23:59:47 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-we0-f197.google.com with SMTP id t60sf5178623wes.8 for ; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 14:59:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=7cGf6HXwBlpWoTgQ30+ZXkUIvwrnA1NmFwKwCciu4ww=; b=KnAeCNecNGOtEyQozpd0cSUoRudIgk7XtpoJ4nreBYTXBZVjV7gt2rKJs7JN7gd09l Ky3zOk2C7FMKQ3RCSxVz+DljKRX90VVy8XnBl2u+Qjb5PTfOrnxaEkwxi+zhpSQrOnfx x1fgDnsS8RlmS5kljPe0dasDJW/SucVhtwsRF7B6rQQL521yGgHujHhULK9Z7cGRtE1e lh5miyLZGNo/TPMg1s6w8hOFCLW9oGv+H7igBtSsZoPDKAGroL4lY1Npa7nnCh8GOabw 1ROKBFUo+rheZ4jWI6aWOpZh8Yjx2NICi0TBXPIUBWYp+SaXJvoy9aGVExZcKuCbdOnY N9gw== X-Received: by 10.180.73.112 with SMTP id k16mr1558140wiv.5.1381269586608; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 14:59:46 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.180.88.39 with SMTP id bd7ls1254668wib.47.canary; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 14:59:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.180.185.77 with SMTP id fa13mr3526790wic.58.1381269585483; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 14:59:45 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from mail-wi0-x22e.google.com (mail-wi0-x22e.google.com [2a00:1450:400c:c05::22e]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id mz18si2176685wic.54.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 08 Oct 2013 14:59:45 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lefevreremy@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::22e as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c05::22e; Original-Received: by mail-wi0-f174.google.com with SMTP id hj3so7358052wib.7 for ; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 14:59:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.180.182.68 with SMTP id ec4mr25711265wic.40.1381269585374; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 14:59:45 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.194.192.33 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 14:59:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1381268094.9101.48.camel@sara> X-Original-Sender: lefevreremy@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lefevreremy@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::22e as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lefevreremy@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list std-proposals@isocpp.org; contact std-proposals+owners@isocpp.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:7199 Archived-At: --047d7b66f599f9b70904e841e23b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I agree with Evgeny for the use of "while" and "until" instead of "first_if". I think they are more intuitive and make more sense. Concerning the return_type, it's true that std::pair is already used for several component in the library and the algorithm shouldn't throw away a useful information like the first not counted iterator. 2013/10/8 Magnus Fromreide > On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 13:56 -0700, Vlad from Moscow wrote: > > I want to change the name in the context of my proposal of > > std::accumulate_first_if that there will be a common name for such > > types of algorithms. > > > > By the way using std::find_if with a predicate resolves the two tasks: > > returning the count and the last iterator. > > If we should change the names then I think the best name would be > > distance_first_if > > since it is about the distance from one point to another in a range, and > the end point is defined as the first entry matching a predicate. > > (I also think the bikeshed should be pink) > > /MF > > -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/d/topic/std-proposals/bXrQrkBw59c/unsubscribe > . > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. > To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. > Visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/. > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/. --047d7b66f599f9b70904e841e23b Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I agree with Evgeny for the use of "while&q= uot; and "until" instead of "first_if". I think they ar= e more intuitive and make more sense.

Concerning the return_ty= pe, it's true that std::pair is already used for several component in t= he library and the algorithm shouldn't throw away a useful information = like the first not counted iterator.


2= 013/10/8 Magnus Fromreide <magfr@lysator.liu.se>
On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 13:56 -0700, Vlad from Moscow wrote= :
> I want to change the name in the context of my proposal of
> std::accumulate_first_if that there will be a common name for such
> types of algorithms.
>
> By the way using std::find_if with a predicate resolves the two tasks:=
> returning the count and the last iterator.

If we should change the names then I think the best name would be

distance_first_if

since it is about the distance from one point to another in a range, and the end point is defined as the first entry matching a predicate.

(I also think the bikeshed should be pink)

/MF

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Goog= le Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/d/topic/std-proposals/bXrQrkBw59c= /unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscrib= e@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/gro= up/std-proposals/.

--
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<= /a>.
--047d7b66f599f9b70904e841e23b-- .