Re: List container strawman 1.3

[Ted Dennison<dennison@telepath.com>]

In article <3C0E1E7E.CA7113F4@brighton.ac.uk>, John English says...
>Ted Dennison wrote:
>> 
>> The latest (1.3) version of the list container strawman is available on my
>> website at
>> http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/Containers-Lists-Unbounded.ads.html .
>
>1) Would it be a good idea to rename the Direction values Front, Back
>   as Forwards, Backwards or To_Front, To_Back to make it clearer
>   what they mean?

I don't think those alternatives would make sense in the case of the list end
insertion routines. However, I'll grant that the terminology makes one of the
other routine parameter names a bit awkward (iterator-based "Remove:). But the
alternatives make it even moreso. I'm also generally not a fan of putting
articles in identifiers. Perhaps that's just an overreaction to seeing people
abuse it by making whole phrases. :-)

There is essentially a choice between biasing the terminology toward ends,
directions, or making two types. I think we should be able to get by without two
types. Biasing it toward directions makes at least two non-defaulted parameters
a bit awkward. Biasing it toward ends makes one defaulted paremeter a little
more awkward (it would still be awkward either way because its a complicated
concept to start with).

What we have right now for usage (assuming instantiation as "Lists") is:
1)
  Lists.Insert
     (Target      => Car_List,
      New_Element => Honda,
      List_End    => Lists.Front);

  Lists.Next
     (Location => Car_Location,
      Toward   => Lists.Front
     );