Thanks kassen, sorry about leaving the melodies variable in there, I will definitely do a better review of any code I send int the future. I thought I should mention that this line: [ 0, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12 ] @=> int melodies[0]; Crashing chuck doesn't seem like a bug to me, because I had created melodies as a two dimensional array with both lengths defined (melodies[10][88]) and that's why it worked for me. Whereas if melodies isn't created yet, assigned something to index 0 shouldn't necessarily work. I can certainly live with integer indexes in my script, and I'll see about adding the bug to the wiki... -Stephen On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 9:17 PM, Kassen wrote:

Hi, Stephen!

2008/11/22 Stephen Sugden

...

Is it possible to mix both types of array keys?

Yes... or at least it *should* be.... ;¬)

...

The code I below works fine until I try to access any elements of the array, then I get an ArrayOutofBounds exception.

I corrected the lack of a type for "melodies".

Then I had a hard time with it, as it turns out that this;

[ 0, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12 ] @=> int melodies[0];

crashes ChucK. That's a bug, and it's good that we accidentally found it but kindly try to avoid such confusion by making sure the code you send works as you described.

Right, on to the business at hand;

...

<<< scales["just"][0] >>>;

You can't print the contents of a array (which this refers to) in one swoop like this, I fear. If you'd like to do this you'd have to loop over the array, if they all need to be on the same line and the length of the array is dynamic I think you'll have to join all elements together in a string and print that.

Let's look at a version that should work properly;

//=========================== float scales[0][0][0];

[ 0, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12 ] @=> int melodies[];

[ [1.0, 1.0], [16.0, 15.0], [9.0, 8.0], [6.0, 5.0], [5.0, 4.0], [4.0, 3.0], [7.0,5.0], [3.0, 2.0], [8.0,5.0], [5.0, 3.0], [7.0, 4.0], [15.0, 8.0], [2.0, 1.0] ] @=> scales["just"];

float et[13][2]; for(0 => int i; i <= 12; ++i){ 1.0 => et[i][0]; Math.pow(2.0, i / 12.0) => et[i][1]; }

et @=> scales["equalTempered"];

for(int n; n< scales["just"][0].cap(); n++) { //goes out of bound for n==0 already <<>>; } //==================

So... that's a bug, yes, and clearing out the associative indexes in favour of ints makes it go away. Good catch!

If you'd like; add it to the Wiki here; http://wiki.cs.princeton.edu/index.php/ChucK/Bugs/Release

Yours, Kas.

_______________________________________________ chuck-users mailing list chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users