Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"bearophile" <bearophileh...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:hl9ipc$26r...@digitalmars.com...
Andrei Alexandrescu:
I don't mind "reversed" but it's longer than "retro" and the convention
doesn't scale. For example, both active and passive forms of "split"
look the same.
For me "retro" is acceptable. I don't love "iota" but I can accept it too.
Other names of Phobos2 can be improved.
I can be happy with either 'retro' or 'reverse'. My feeling on 'iota' used
to be "It's not great, but I'm fine with it". But now I can't remember what
the hell it does; no idea. The only things that come to mind are "Dyslexic
Integer to ASCII conversion", and Futurama's "Tiny Iota? I could never be as
good as him. He was a great Blurnsball player."
retro does have something going for it that iota doesn't. Everybody I
talked to who saw "retro" in my article on ranges knew immediately what
it does, and furthermore remembered the name later.
Andrei
