ch-ch-changes

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Andrei Alexandrescu" <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote in message 
news:gloppm$1vog$1 at digitalmars.com...
> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 11:15 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
> [...]
>>> Feedback welcome.
>>
>> This is some awesome stuff.  std.range and std.algorithm are really
>> coming together into a compelling whole.  I don't know what else to
>> say - _you_ seem to know what you're doing!
>>
>> It's a minor point, but in the docs, with all the templating madness
>> it gets very hard to find the name of the symbol actually being
>> documented.  For example:
>>
>> Filter!(unaryFun!(pred),Chain!(Ranges)) filter(alias pred,
>> Ranges...)(Ranges rs);
>>
>> "filter" gets lost in the middle.  Could it be highlighted, or moved
>> to the front (using a Pascal-like "func(params) : returntype" syntax
>> instead)?
>
> Good point. Actually I've been experimenting with using "auto" for the 
> return type. That does work most of the time, but unfortunately ddoc 
> doesn't understand it. Then,
>
>> Also - "toe" is still a stupid name.  ;)  "first" and "last" would
>> have been my first choices, they seem so obvious.
>
> Turns out toe isn't half bad when I was coding with it - all I needed was 
> something short and memorable.
>
> One problem with "first" is that it sometimes suggests something else. For 
> example, if I have a generator for the numbers 1 to 10 and have advanced 
> it a bit, gen.first suggests I'm looking back to the very first element, 
> not the state of the iteration. I agree that gen.head isn't terribly 
> evocative either, but then at least it doesn't evoke something wrong :o).
>
> Anyhow, how about doing what Haskell does? They use "head" and "last". And 
> at least we'd be able to blame *them* if anyone doesn't like the names 
> :o). Thoughts?
>
>
> Andrei

Isn't "tail" the standard counterpart to "head"? ("toe" just doesn't sound 
good)