Is it wrong to assume that a Range is always a 2-dimensional set? Can ranges ever be Nth dimensional?
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 8:41 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Matthew Pocock < > turingatemyhams...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Range is not a sub-type of pair. You can think of a pair as being an >> ordered >> set of 2 items. A Range is a contiguous set defined by a lower and upper >> bound (which may or may not be inclusive). Given some flag >> Clusive=Inclusive|Exclusive, then every range is uniquely identified by a >> single Pair<Pair<Clusive, numeric>>. The in-memory representation of the >> data defining a pair and a range may be the same, but they are not at all >> the same kind of thing. >> > > I understand the semantic difference, but to me the representation is the > same, unless you get in the Iterable game (see below.) But it does now feel > -- with your clear explanation, thank you -- that they are different beasts. > > The Inclusive|Exclusive part is not in the code so that does not feel like a > fair argument to support the difference though. > > If "a Range is a contiguous set" (a "list" since a set is not ordered), then > it would make sense to support Iterable so you can use it in a for-each > loop, this can be post 3.0 (the remove method in Iterator might be an > issue.) > > Gary > > >> >> Matthew >> >> On 18 May 2011 17:46, Matt Benson <gudnabr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:32 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > > Why doesn't a Range does extend Pair? It's pretty clear (to me at >> least) >> > > that a range is a pair of values. >> > > >> > > Because the Pair is in our tuple package, it means that it should >> follow >> > > tuple logic and be thought of as an ordered list of elements, in this >> > case >> > > two elements. >> > > >> > > The methods that Range has that are not in Pair could be moved there. >> > > >> > >> > IMHO a Range is not precisely a Pair, though it could define its >> > _limits_ in those terms. >> > >> > Matt >> > >> > > -- >> > > Thank you, >> > > Gary >> > > >> > > http://garygregory.wordpress.com/ >> > > http://garygregory.com/ >> > > http://people.apache.org/~ggregory/ >> > > http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >> > > >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > >> > >> >> >> -- >> Matthew Pocock >> mailto: turingatemyhams...@gmail.com >> gchat: turingatemyhams...@gmail.com >> msn: matthew_poc...@yahoo.co.uk >> irc.freenode.net: drdozer >> (0191) 2566550 >> > > > > -- > Thank you, > Gary > > http://garygregory.wordpress.com/ > http://garygregory.com/ > http://people.apache.org/~ggregory/ > http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
