[chuck-users] Problem with chuck language specification

[Ge Wang]

Hi Robin and all,

> Problem: Chuck language definition uses cap(), when it should use 
> size().

This is a good point to bring up.  For now, we use cap() instead of 
size(), because cap() means capacity whereas size() may have more than 
one interpretation.  However, size() is on the way.  We plan to support 
push_back() and pop_back() operations on arrays (as you saw in the 
source), which would increment/decrement 'size' and manage the capacity 
automatically.  For this case, size() would make sense (and would be 
more consistent with STL).

If this naming turns out to be undesirable, we may modify it for a 
future version.

Another problem: we are trying find a good solution for to get the size 
of the associative array, and maybe a way to iterate through the map.  
Ideally, this would be concise, clear, and does not conflict with 
operations dealing with the vector portion of the array.  Thoughts 
anyone?

Best
Ge!