Complexity nomenclature

[Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d]

On 12/03/2015 08:37 PM, Jack Stouffer wrote:
> On Friday, 4 December 2015 at 01:27:42 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> These complexities must be reflected in the name of the primitives.
>
> I don't see why. IMO, names should convey what the function does, not
> how it does it. Complexity is usually put in the function documentation
> in Phobos when it's not constant, especially for range based ones, I
> don't see a reason to change that.

Complexity is part of the semantics, and in my design names and their 
semantics go hand in hand. -- Andrei