Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 05:45:12PM -0600, John Williams wrote:
> : What happens when the Pascal programmer declares > : > : my int @ints is shape(-10..10); > : > : Does it blow up? > > No. > > : If not, does @ints[-1] mean the element with index -1 or the last element? > > The element with index -1. Arrays with explicit ranges don't use the > minus notation to count from the end. If '*' is already going to be a special term when expecting an array index, I could imagine using it also as a term for the end of the array -- which end depending on whether it is used in addition or subtraction. my int @ints is shape(-10..10;0..3); @ints[*+0;*-0] =:= @ints[-10;3]; (Though I cannot see any reason why I would want to use something like that, I am sure someone somewhere would find it useful ...) > We probably need to come up with some other notation for the > beginning and end indexes. But it'd be nice if that were a little > shorter than: > > @ints.shape[0].beg > @ints.shape[0].end > > Suggestions? Maybe we just need integers with "whence" properties... :-) A _little_ shorter, okay? If @ints.shape[0] is a range, then: my int @ints is shape(-10..10;0..3); @ints.shape[0;0] == -10; @ints.shape[0;-1] == 10; Assuming shape has the proper shape, that is. :-) And, in scalar context, it would still return the size. my int @ints is shape(-10..10;0..3); @ints.shape[0] == 21; ... now, I don't know if I mean that seriously. You be the judge. :-) Eirik -- -------- Rule of Feline Frustration: -------* I bet you never noticed that When your cat has fallen asleep on your lap | "homeowner" has the word and looks utterly content and adorable, you | "meow" in the middle of it. will suddenly have to go to the bathroom. *------------- P. McGraw ----
