"Jeff Garland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sure, can do. What would you call it: merge_inclusive, earliest_latest, rename > merge to union and call it merge, something else?
Yes, the hardest thing is to think of a name. I don't think you can rename merge to union, since I suspect you chose merge originally because "union" is a keyword. In strict set terms, the proposed new function really is the union, whereas the existing merge is something else, a sort of "conditional" union. Maybe you can leave merge as is, and call the new thing simple_union, or union_with, to get around the keyword problem. I think I favour simple_union. Chris _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
