On 10/19/2015 11:57 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote: > OTOH, using the before(K)/after(K), it's easier : > > getting the previous key > ------------------------ > > tuple = before(K); > > getting the next key > -------------------- > > tuple = after(K); > > No test, not need to remember if the seek(K) method set the position > before or after K. > > > Is that extravagant, or just spurious ? I mean, we can live with > seek(K), it does the job, I just wonder if the additional methods don't > mke the developer lifer easier. > > wdyt ? >
I like the before/after approach, we already have it in other places like the Cursor interface. Kind Regards, Stefan
