On 01/23/2011 12:40 AM, so wrote:
Yes, I'm absolutely in agreement with the naming (and thrilled too). I imagine a putative user looking through std.algorithm ("let's see... what find functions are out there?"). That makes findPieces easy to get to, whereas "trisect" would be oddly situated in the alphabetic list and oddly named enough to be virtually undiscoverable.If this is the reasoning. This is a split function, not a find.
Agreed, the function does not belong to the sub-list of find*, instead to split*. So's proposal "splitAt" not only respects that, but tells more accurate information. "findPieces" does not tell anything, thus anyone would expect it to cut the string into an arbitrary number of pieces.
Denis _________________ vita es estrany spir.wikidot.com
