Re: [boost] [range] #11202: boost.sort header conflicts with boost.range header

On 3 September 2018 10:22, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:

On 09/03/18 11:42, Gareth Sylvester-Bradley via Boost wrote:

...

At 2 Sep 2018 18:48, Edward Diener via Boost wrote:

...

On 9/2/2018 10:09 AM, Mathias Gaunard via Boost wrote:

...

On 2 September 2018 at 03:21, Steven Ross via Boost wrote:

...

...

I think it is a bad idea to make an exception for boost::range::sort when all the other range algorithms are directly in boost:: .

It's not pretty, but it sounds reasonable to me. Do you have a counterproposal?

Rename the "sort" library to something else. "sortlib" is very bad, but other names could be found.

I was just suggesting a change in the namespace name to something else. It can still be called the sort library, even if the namespace is not boost::sort.

Would it be appropriate to adopt the strategy of Boost.Tuple, whose namespace is boost::tuples, and use boost::sorts as the library namespace?

The naming consistency guidelines say:

* The library's primary namespace (in parent ::boost) is given that same name, except when there's a component with that name (e.g., boost::tuple), in which case the namespace name is pluralized. For example, ::boost::filesystem.

That's maybe not quite the case here, but it's not horrible!

I'm not a native speaker, but I don't think "sort", in the meaning the library puts in it, has a plural form as it is a verb. "Sorting" might be an alternative.

Native speakers are not always the best people to make these decisions, as they're more like to use idioms or obscure language. :-) However, https://www.google.com/search?q=sort+meaning gives me: Sort, noun 2. [Computing] "the arrangement of data in a prescribed sequence." as well as the verb, "arrange systematically in groups; separate according to type." But boost::sorting works too! G