[chuck-users] Problem with chuck language specification

Robin Davies robin.davies at quest.com
Fri Sep 16 09:31:53 EDT 2005

You can call size() on a map. Works fine. I can't speak for all
implementations, but Microft STL has a in internal _size member, so this
is a low-cost operation. 

- Robin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: chuck-users-bounces at lists.cs.princeton.edu [mailto:chuck-users-
> bounces at lists.cs.princeton.edu] On Behalf Of Ge Wang
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 1:25 AM
> To: ChucK Users Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [chuck-users] Problem with chuck language specification
> 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
> push_back() and pop_back() operations on arrays (as you saw in the
> source), which would increment/decrement 'size' and manage the
> 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
> 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!
> _______________________________________________
> chuck-users mailing list
> chuck-users at lists.cs.princeton.edu
> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users

More information about the chuck-users mailing list