Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:

Smylers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Yes. C<unshift> is a terrible name; when teaching Perl I feel
embarrassed on introducing it.



C<unshift>'s only virtue, IMHO, is that it's clearly the inverse of C<shift>. But I think the spelling and aural relationship between C<push>, C<pop>, C<pull>, and C<put> is clear enough to negate that.

But then, I'm a little biased.

Except that push and pull are logical opposites linguistically, but not in standard CS parlance. could be very confusing.

There's a possibility of using C<enq> and C<deq> for enqueue/dequeue, except that C<deq> == C<pop> in standard implementations.

So C<enq> and C<shift>? yeck.

-- Rod Adams





Reply via email to