Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

[eiffel-nice-library] ARRAY: 'valid_index'

Expand Messages
  • Roger Browne
    Welcome back to the ELKS 2000 discussions! I d like to get the ball rolling again by discussing the following features: ARRAY valid_index ARRAY count ARRAY
    Message 1 of 3 , Jan 3, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      Welcome back to the ELKS 2000 discussions! I'd like to get the ball
      rolling again by discussing the following features:

      ARRAY valid_index
      ARRAY count
      ARRAY upper
      ARRAY lower

      I'll start with 'valid_index'. Here's the ELKS 1995 version:

      valid_index (i: INTEGER): BOOLEAN
      -- Is i within the bounds of the array?

      Here's the proposed ELKS 2000 version, with Jim McKim's specification:

      valid_index (i: INTEGER): BOOLEAN
      -- Is `i' within bounds?
      ensure
      definition: Result = ((lower <= i) and (i <= upper))

      Now is a good time to raise any issues associated with 'valid_index'.
      We'll vote on it towards the end of this week, unless anything arises
      that requires further discussion.

      I'll start a discussion about 'count', 'upper' and 'lower' in the next
      day or two (but you are always welcome to discuss any feature at any
      time).

      Regards,
      Roger
      --
      Roger Browne - roger@... - Everything Eiffel
      19 Eden Park Lancaster LA1 4SJ UK - Phone +44 1524 32428
    • Friedrich Dominicus
      First I want to say hello. I m joining the party a bit late but maybe not too late. Dominique Colnet pointed out that here the new ELKS is discussed, I just
      Message 2 of 3 , Jan 6, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        First I want to say hello. I'm joining the party a bit late but maybe
        not too late. Dominique Colnet pointed out that here the new ELKS is
        discussed, I just send a message to the SmallEiffel mailing List
        complaining about the signature for infix "^" in class NUMERIC. And
        I've discussed some points with Roger in private e-mails. Maybe it's
        better to publish here.



        "roger browne" <egroup-@...> wrote:
        original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/eiffel-nice-library/?star
        t=860
        > Welcome back to the ELKS 2000 discussions! I'd like to get the ball
        > rolling again by discussing the following features:
        >
        > ARRAY valid_index
        > ARRAY count
        > ARRAY upper
        > ARRAY lower
        >
        > I'll start with 'valid_index'. Here's the ELKS 1995 version:
        >
        > valid_index (i: INTEGER): BOOLEAN
        > -- Is i within the bounds of the array?

        Just one question here, will INTEGERS have some limits? It's not
        obvious from the short form but all Eiffel compilers use 32 signed
        numbers and that might be too short in the future.

        Regards
        Friedrich
      • Durchholz, Joachim
        ... Well, the focus in this mailing list is on STRING and ARRAY right now, and there is no ongoing work on INTEGER (or on any other classes beyond
        Message 3 of 3 , Jan 6, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          > Will INTEGERS have some limits?

          Well, the focus in this mailing list is on STRING and ARRAY right now, and
          there is no ongoing work on INTEGER (or on any other classes beyond
          STRING/ARRAY).

          In a separate effort, Bertrand Meyer is in the process of revisiting the
          INTEGER aspects language and standard library. The current proposal has an
          unlimited-size integer type, with some mechanisms to take advantage of
          hardware integers. I'd say that this will be one of the things that will
          make it into the NICE language standard fast once the usual concerns are
          taken care of.

          Regards,
          Joachim
          --
          This is not an official statement from my employer or from NICE.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.