ooc-dev team mailing list archive

[cd rubin <launchpad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hey all

In which case shouldn't the methods be called 'forwards' and 'backwards'? I
think that fits better with the language :

"iterate over a list backwards"

iter := list backwards()

and it removes possible confusion stemming from calling the method 'front'
and getting an iterator instead of the first item of the list!

 - Daniel (cdrubin)

On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Josh Roesslein <jroesslein@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> Bart makes a good point that not all Iterables will have an ordered
> structure (ex: socket input/output streams).
> I think it would make more sense having front() and back() methods in List
> that returns Iterators that either traverse
> the list head to tail or vice versa.
>
> Josh
>
> On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Amos Wenger <amoswenger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> So what then? iterator~back() ?
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Bart van der Werf <bluelive@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not sure.
>>>
>>> Alot of iterables have no order, so if front/back is the default way to
>>> get an iterator it would make little sense.
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ooc-dev<https://launchpad.net/%7Eooc-dev>
>> Post to     : ooc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ooc-dev<https://launchpad.net/%7Eooc-dev>
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ooc-dev<https://launchpad.net/%7Eooc-dev>
> Post to     : ooc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ooc-dev<https://launchpad.net/%7Eooc-dev>
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>