More flexible sorted ranges?

[Xinok via Digitalmars-d-learn]

On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 17:21:04 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:
> On Sunday, 2 November 2014 at 16:59:30 UTC, bearophile wrote:
>> Ola Fosheim Grøstad:
>>
>>> Shouldn't sorted range maintain the invariant automatically 
>>> in order to remain typesafe?
>>
>> Yes, of course.
>
> If SortedRange is fixed, please also switch the names of 
> upperBound and lowerBound… They are currently wrong. An 
> upperBound on something should return the values lower than it 
> and a lowerBound should return values larger…
>
> (C++ got it right).

D got it right. C++ returns an iterator which can be a bit 
confusing. D returns a slice so it's meaning is much clearer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper_and_lower_bounds

http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/algorithm/upper_bound/