On Thursday, May 17, 2012 18:52:26 Peter Alexander wrote: > On Thursday, 17 May 2012 at 15:26:19 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu > > wrote: > > I agree binarySearch is more precise, but I also think it's a > > minor issue not worth the cost of changing at this point. > > Improving names of things in the standard library is a quest > > that could go forever, make everybody happy we're making > > progress, and achieve no substantial gain. > > No need to change anything, just add something: > > bool binarySearch(Range, Value)(Range range, Value value) > { > return assumeSorted(range).contains(value); > } > > (constraints, predicates and the myriad of qualifiers/decorations > omitted for clarity).
Yeah, but then we've added a function which adds no real functionality, and we generally try to avoid that. So, it _might_ be reasonable to add it, but it tends to go against how we're trying to function. - Jonathan M Davis