From: Robert Klemme <shortcutter@...>
Date: 2007-10-23T22:39:00+09:00
Subject: Re: pop/push, shift/unshift

2007/10/23, Trans <transfire@gmail.com>:
>
>
> On Oct 22, 11:53 pm, "Simon Schuster" <significa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > the inconsistency in naming bothers me. :P I would imagine that it
> > comes from push/pop being older, and shift/unshift being added later
> > (probably I would guess that both of these are pre-ruby programming
> > ideas. I know I've seen push/pop before.)
> >
> > I would like to see either push/pop changed to be
> > something/unsomething, or shift/unshift changed to be um, visualish
> > ideas of what's going on (or whatever push/pop is.) my preference
> > would be push/pop changed to something/unsomething. or maybe
> > front_add, front_del, back_add, back_del.
> >
> > just trying to get a gut-grip on these four array processes, and I'm
> > pushing and popping and shifting and unshifting left and right (and
> > back and forth?) and it's taking a surprising amount of time to "grok"
> > them. does anyone think this is a naming convention that could benefit
> > with some change, or am I just being strange?
>
> Some things you just have to get used to. And some things are worth
> getting used to ;)
>
> I think push and pop are worthy, but I've never come to terms with
> shift and unshift. Not only do they seem backwards to me, but the
> words themselves have little mnemonic value. In my work I often alias
> shift as pull. That fits nicely with push and pop. Unfortunately I've
> yet to find a better substitute for unshift. I've tried things like
> 'pot' (for put on top) and 'place', and more recently 'poke', though
> traditionally that is more akin to insert, but nothing has really
> stood out as of yet.

If you do bourne shell programming then "shift" will be familiar.
From there it's not too far to "unshift". :-)

Kind regards

robert