On Wed, 12 Jan 2011 03:45:11 -0500, Lars T. Kyllingstad
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jan 2011 15:13:13 +0100, spir wrote:
On 01/11/2011 02:22 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
A tree is a kind of set, so instead of "insert()" I'd like a name like
"add()".
(But maybe this is not standard in D).
The function names must be consistent across containers, because the
point is that complexity and semantic requirements are attached to the
function name. The function names were decided long ago by Andrei, and
I don't think insert is a bad name (I believe std::set and std::map in
C++ STL uses insert).
I have thought at this naming issue, precisely, for a while. "add" is
bad because of connotation with "addition". D does not use '+' as
operator for putting new elements in a container: this is a very
sensible choice imo.
"insert" is bad because of "in-between" connotation: does not fit when
putting an element at the end of a seq, even less for unordered
containers. "put" instead seems to me the right term, obvious and
general enough: one puts a new element in there. This can nicely adapt
to very diverse container types such as sequences including stacks (no
explicite index --> put at end), sets/AAs, trees,...
I seem to remember this being discussed before, and 'put' being rejected
for fear of confusion with the output range interface.
technically, it is an output range ;)
-Steve
