My guess is that it inserts null pointers into the array as you expand it,
which doesn't feel totally unreasonable. For primitives there's usually
intuitive default value that the compiler can use, with objects (that need
allocated resources for their instances, which could be either the declared
type or a subclass), null is the logical default.
On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 10:54 PM, George Locke wrote: that works. i'm surprised that the .size method doesn't work, tho, since
it does work on primitive type arrays. I guess there's no instantiation
happening or something... Thanks! - George On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 4:24 PM, Perry R Cook 5. how do you resize an object array? (George Locke) Here's something that should be useful.
(from the .pdf ChucK Manual, under Dynamic Arrays,
there's more there about it) [64, 65, 60, 59] @=> int notes[]; notes << 58; // notes is [64, 65, 60, 59, 58]
notes << 60; // notes is [64, 65, 60, 59, 58, 60] notes.popBack(); // [64, 65, 60, 59, 58] notes << 64 << 65 << 60; // [64, 65, 60, 59, 58, 64, 65, 60] _______________________________________________
chuck-users mailing list
chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu
https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users _______________________________________________
chuck-users mailing list
chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu
https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users --
Release me, insect, or I will destroy the Cosmos!