Login | Register
My pages Projects Community openCollabNet

Discussions > users > [Fwd: Re: [Ada-Comment] Updated AI-302-3, Container Library, posted]

Discussion topic

Back to topic list

[Fwd: Re: [Ada-Comment] Updated AI-302-3, Container Library, posted]


Author Matthew Heaney <mheaney at on2 dot com>
Full name Matthew Heaney <mheaney at on2 dot com>
Date 2004-05-19 09:54:34 PDT
Message -------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Ada-Comment] Updated AI-302-3, Container Library, posted
Resent-Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 12:44:24 -0400
Resent-From: ada-comment at ada-auth dot org
Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 09:46:33 -0400
From: Michael F. Yoder <franzj at comcast dot net>
Reply-To: Ada-Comment List <ada-comment@ada-​auth.org>
To: Ada-Comment List <ada-comment@ada-​auth.org>
<ADC4B666356DC741​9E0A0CD83FE31E7401E9​647E at guliver dot openu.l​ocal>
<40A90137.4050306​@on2.com> <40A90918.80FDB99​2@sofcheck.com>

Whether 2 or 4 operations are included, it would be pleasant if the
names came from a consistent scheme. For example:

    Lt_Item (S, K) < K
    Le_Item (S, K) <= K
    Gt_Item (S, K) > K
    Ge_Item (S, K) >= K

This is easier to do if the "Lt" and "Gt" operations are the only two
provided. For example, 'Predecessor' and 'Successor' would be fine.
Floor for Le_Item and Ceiling for Ge_Item, together with Predecessor and
Successor, would be acceptable.

Tucker Taft wrote:

>Will this never end? ;-)
>My *major* complaint with Upper_Limit, Lower_Limit,
>Upper_Bound, Lower_Bound, etc. is that the names
>make no intuitive sense.
>If you could come up with some reasonable names,
>I might support the inclusion. I do not find
>any of the ones that have been proposed thus far
>Predecessor and Successor might make it, where they
>are allowed to take a key that might or might
>not appear in the set, and return the cursor for
>the item in the set next preceding or following the given key.
>Matthew Heaney wrote:
>>I am in favor of providing the following four operations:
>>Lower_Limit (S, K) < K (AKA "Ground", "Previous_Floor")
>>Floor (S, K) <= K
>>Ceiling (S, K) >= K (AKA Lower_Bound)
>>Upper_Limit (S, K) > K (AKA Upper_Bound, "Roof", "Next_Ceiling")
>>I think Tucker only wants the middle two.
>>If I had to pick only two, then I'd pick the last two (Ceiling and
>>Upper_Limit). (This is what the STL & Charles do, and what was in the
>>API prior to the ARG meeting in Phoenix.)
>>There seems to be agreement that this functionality is useful. One of
>>the issues is that several of the ARG reviewers were confused by the
>>names "Lower_Bound" and "Upper_Bound".
>"Several" => "All" ;-)


You have received this message because you subscribed to the Ada-Comment
mailing list. To leave the Ada-Comment list, send an email with
'leave Ada-Comment' in the body to listserv at ada-auth dot org. For help
on the other commands available, send 'help Ada-Comment' to the same
Problems? Send mail to agent at ada-auth dot org. This list is operated by
The Ada Resource Association, PO Box 1540, Fairfax VA 22038-1540.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@ch​arles.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help at charles dot tigris dot org

« Previous message in topic | 1 of 1 | Next message in topic »


Show all messages in topic

[Fwd: Re: [Ada-Comment] Updated AI-302-3, Container Library, posted] Matthew Heaney <mheaney at on2 dot com> Matthew Heaney <mheaney at on2 dot com> 2004-05-19 09:54:34 PDT
Messages per page: