On 02/07/2013 04:38 PM, Neil Groves wrote:
Check the documentation of "remove_erase" algorithm. It says:
"(...) This is in contrast to the *remove* algorithm which merely rearranges elements. (...)"
Thanks for this report it is true that this one is incorrect. This was not what your original email contained. You posted a snippet from the correct example. You also explicitly stated: "I believe it's not in contrast to the "erase" algorithm but rather the "remove" algorithm.". You didn't highlight that remove_erase_if was inconsistent to remove_erase. From what was presented the most likely explanation was that you had a fairly common mis-aprehension to many others about the std::erase algorithm. I'm delighted that this is not the case, but please don't take offence.
Sorry for this misunderstanding. To me, my intent was clear, but it seems that the words were not chosen right.
On the other hand, the documentation of "remove_erase_if" algorithm says:
"(...) This is in contrast to the *erase* algorithm which merely rearranges elements. (...)"
Can you see the difference?
I can see the defect now that the relevant section has been highlighted. I understand that you meant that the documentation for remove_erase is incorrect rather than remove_erase_if. I shall correct this for the next release.
As others have already pointed out the problem lays in the documentation of 'remove_erase_if' algorithm.
WBR, Adam Romanek
Thanks for the report, Neil Groves
I'm glad I could help. WBR, Adam Romanek