On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 06:14:01PM +0100, Thorsten Ottosen wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "James Curran/MVP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > While there is a certain elegance to the names, I'd have to vote > against > > those. It's not immediately obvious from the names trim/trimmed which one > > is inplace and which isn't. > > well, I would say it is. verbs in the imperative donote mutation, adjectives > denote copy. > > > Further, in the matter of > > lower_cased/to_lower_case, if you guess wrong, the other one isn't nearby > in > > an alphabetic listing of functions. > > remove or add "to_" from one of them? > I have already changed names to to_lower and to_lower_copy.
This way it conform with STL algorithm nameing-rules. IMO it's not the most beautiful way, but at least it is standard .. Pavol _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
