RFC: naming for FrontTransversal and Transversal ranges

[BLS]

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> 
> I'm defining two ranges that go vertically over a range of ranges. 
> Consider for example an int[][]. That's a range that has a range as its 
> element type.
> 
> FrontTransversal goes transversally over the range of ranges and returns 
> the front of each element in turn:
> 
>     int[][] x = new int[][2];
>     x[0] = [1, 2];
>     x[1] = [3, 4];
>     auto ror = frontTransversal(x);
>     auto witness = [ 1, 3 ];
>     uint i;
>     foreach (e; ror) assert(e == witness[i++]);
>     assert(i == 2);
> 
> Then Transversal does a similar thing, just that instead of going 
> through the front of each range, it goes over a column set during 
> construction:
> 
>     int[][] x = new int[][2];
>     x[0] = [1, 2];
>     x[1] = [3, 4];
>     auto ror = transversal(x, 1);
>     auto witness = [ 2, 4 ];
>     uint i;
>     foreach (e; ror) assert(e == witness[i++]);
>     assert(i == 2);
> 
> Question is, what would be two good names for these ranges?
> 
> 
> Andrei

Question is, how this fits into a collection/container package.

..So frankly, I don't worry about naming  conventions. I am more 
concerned about ranges within a let's say dynamic d e queue.
Lock free ADTs  are a final proof of product , no ?

Maybe I miss something.
But fact is : D2 (Phobos) still don't have (not even in it's brand new 
incarnation ) support for simple humpty dumpty collections. So Proof of 
product is where ?