Michel Fortin wrote: > I disagree. How adding the "is" it disambiguate between the predicate > and the assertion? "x.isBounded" reads more like "x is bounded" (the > assertion) than "is x bounded" (the predicate).
Method syntax usually leads to incorrect word order. "a.b(c)", should not be read as "a does b to c", but as "Computer, do b to a and c.". It's a command to the computer, not a statement. In that context, "isBounded(x)" reads as "Computer, is x bounded?". I'm also in favor of "asBounded(x)" (treat x as a bounded range) and "toBounded(x)" (convert x to a bounded range, not really applicable for "bounded"). > Anyway, more than advocating for or against the "is" prefix, I mostly > want things to be coherent. If you use "is" for bounded, you should use > "is" for empty too. That's why I'm suggesting there is a section about > choosing names in Phobos' Naming Conventions. Agreed. -- Rainer Deyke - rain...@eldwood.com
