From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-26 08:30:02
> ierase_nth_copy( s, "s", 1 );
>
> this does not erase the 1st copy of "s", but the second. What's the
> rationale for this? I don't find it intuitive.
there is another thing which I forgot to mention.All the
XXX_first functions seems not to be needed since I can just write
XXX_nth( s, 1 ); This constitutes quite a few functions that can be removed
from the interface. Does anybody else
feels that this is the right to do?
-Thorsten