Re: [gobo-eiffel-develop] Iterators for DS_TABLE?

[Colin A. <col...@go...>]

On 20/03/2008, Eric Bezault <er...@go...> wrote:

> These feature names suggest that only the key is passed to the
>  agent. I think that we need the three kinds of iterators:
>  over the items, over the keys, and over both. The most difficult
>  part is to find names. What about `do_all', `do_all_key' and
>  `do_all_keyed'? Any better suggestion?
>
>  Well, in fact to iterate only on keys I guess we can do
>  `my_table.keys.do_all'... So, we might need only two kinds of
>  iterators after all. What about `do_all' and `do_all_with_key',
>  the latter being similar to `do_all_with_index'?

Yes, that sounds the best compromise.

>  Note that DS_TABLE is not linear. Only DS_SPARSE_TABLE is.
>  I don't remember why DS_TABLE is not linear, but I'm not
>  currently in a mood to change that to make it linear.

There is nothing linear about for_all_with_keys and there_exists_with_keys.
Do_all_with_index/do_if_with_index imply a linear ordering, so we
won't want them in DS_TABLE. I see no implied linearity with
do_all_with_keys, do_if_with_keys (or for that matter do_all and
do_if, just from the names). It all depends upon what the header
comment says. So for do_all_with_keys we can just word the header
comment to state that no particular order may be relied upon. Likewise
for do_if_with_keys. Note that this will allow for concurrent
implementations using SCOOP or other concurrent technologies.