Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of Ticket #9778, comment 2


Ignore:
Timestamp:
May 18, 2013, 2:34:17 AM (12 years ago)
Author:
anevilyak

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Ticket #9778, comment 2

    initial v1  
    11Replying to [comment:1 anevilyak]:
    2 > I meant to indicate this earlier: one caveat to the above is that currently, the adjust ranges feature uses the type's indicated bounds as the upper/lower bound for what ranges the user is allowed to enter. Ergo, for an array type with 10 elements, the adjustable range would self limit to only accepting elements within indices 0-9. For the case where the actual number of elements is smaller, this is fine, but if the true size is larger it'd presently require actually using the full Cast As feature to specify the larger array dimension first.
    3 >
    4 > Furthermore, as a note to myself, the above range setting feature is currently actually not available for value nodes that have been cast to arrays, as those are set up as a pointer node with a hidden array type as a child. Since the top level node does not show up as an array type, the menu option isn't added. That needs to be addressed as well, though it will be relatively trivial to detect/compensate for. (Edit: this part has been addressed in hrev45697. The larger question of whether the aforementioned caveat is acceptable or not remains though.)
     2> Furthermore, as a note to myself, the above range setting feature is currently actually not available for value nodes that have been cast to arrays, as those are set up as a pointer node with a hidden array type as a child. Since the top level node does not show up as an array type, the menu option isn't added. That needs to be addressed as well, though it will be relatively trivial to detect/compensate for.
     3
     4This part has been addressed in hrev45697. The larger question of whether the aforementioned caveat is acceptable or not remains though.