Changes between Version 15 and Version 16 of ArrayTasklist

Timestamp:

10/23/09 18:39:34 (12 years ago)

Author:

kurahaupo

Comment:

Arrays as mix-ins

ArrayTasklist

@@ -49 +49 @@
  * Is there room to make new types of resizable array that target raw buffer use and ''don't'' allow push, pop, shift and unshift?
 
- * The current implementations of resizable array PMC's are derived from fixed-sized array PMC's. However the (current) use of the "size" field -- provided by the base PMC -- is arguably incorrect, in that it does not track the allocated size as it would for the fixed-sized version. Instead of changing the meaning of "size" in the base PMC, we should call it "allocated_size", and then in the derived PMC have "logical_size". This means that the memory-safety of the "allocated_size" bound is then implemented only once, within the base PMC.
+ * Is the inheritance from Fixed to Resizeable wrong?
 
- * A general-purpose resizable array would need these attrs:
-   * element_type (int8, int16, int32, int64, int128, float32, float64, float128, string, pmc)
-   * allocated_size
-   * initialized_size
-   * logical_size
-   * index_offset (used to make shift and unshift operate efficiently, not to allow arbitrary base indexing)
+ * What's the difference between "Array" and "ResizeablePMCArray"?
 
  * My dictionaries can't agree whether the spelling is "resizable" or "resizeable"; if the latter, should we fix the spelling now, later, or never?
@@ -64 +59 @@
 Arrays are overloaded to perform several roles:
 
+ * Tuple (A composite value being a list of values, rather than a container)
  * Indexable ("Hashes with Integer Keys")
  * Stack (Push and Pop, or Shift and Unshift)
@@ -91 +87 @@
  * Deprecate and remove Array PMC type.
 
+ * The current implementations of resizable array PMC's are derived from fixed-sized array PMC's. However the (current) use of the "size" field -- provided by the base PMC -- is arguably incorrect, in that it does not track the allocated size as it would for the fixed-sized version. Instead of changing the meaning of "size" in the base PMC, we should call it "allocated_size", and then in the derived PMC have "logical_size". This means that the memory-safety of the "allocated_size" bound is then implemented only once, within the base PMC.
+
+ * Refactor all the classes as mix-ins between two groups of classes:
+   # one group of classes that know the type of each element (int, num, str, pmc, any), and
+   # another group of classes that compute memory addresses for indexed elements, perform resizing (or not), and report number of elements.
+   (These latter would if necessary target the roles listed above, but a single compromise implementation would also work. -- kurahaupo)
+
+   A general-purpose resizable array would need these attrs:
+   * element_type (bit, int8, int16, int32, int64, int128, float32, float64, float128, string, pmc, any)
+   * allocated_size
+   * initialized_size
+   * logical_size
+   * index_offset (used to make shift and unshift operate efficiently, not to allow arbitrary base indexing)
+
 = Related Tickets =