Design of intuitive interfaces

[Lars T. Kyllingstad]

Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 16:21:29 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu 
> <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
> 
>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>> Michel Fortin wrote:
>>>> On 2010-02-21 02:15:23 -0500, Norbert Nemec 
>>>> <Norbert at Nemec-online.de> said:
>>>>> similarly, I would suggest
>>>>>
>>>>> "reverse" to sort in-place
>>>>> "reversed" to return a modified copy
>>>>
>>>> I that's a not so bad solution, applicable to almost any word. There 
>>>> are cases where it doesn't work ('split'), but probably not too much.
>>>  "split" - to split in place
>>> "splat" - to return a modified copy
>>
>> Just to clarify: there is some point being missed here. It's not about 
>> in-place vs. copy. Please check retro's documentation.
> 
> By copy he means it doesn't affect the original.  Retro returns a 
> "virtual" copy :)

But it's a valid point.  There are three degrees of freedom here, which 
ideally should be reflected in the API: in-place, copy and view (or 
virtual copy if you like).

-Lars