• Ivan Senji (28/28) May 04 2004 There are many ways (for example) to create a twodimensional
• Drew McCormack (9/15) May 04 2004 I agree. I think this would be more logical than the current state of
• Norbert Nemec (14/36) May 04 2004 Be careful there! Statically sized arrays are something different from
• Ivan Senji (8/44) May 04 2004 array
• Norbert Nemec (4/19) May 05 2004 I have just started to write up a detailed proposal for multidimensional...
• Ivan Senji (5/24) May 05 2004 for

"Ivan Senji" <ivan.senji public.srce.hr> writes:

There are many ways (for example) to create a twodimensional
dynamic array in D:

(a)
 int[][] p1;
 p1 = new int[][15];
 for(int i=0;i<p1.length; i++)
 {
  p1[i] = new int[i+5];
 }

(b)
 int[][] p2;
 for(int i=0;i<15; i++)
 {
  p2 ~= new int[i+5];
 }

(c)
 int[][] p3;
 p3.length = 15;
 for(int i=0;i<15; i++)
 {
  p3[i].length=i+5;
 }

and it would be easy to combine (a) and (b) to have two more ways.

There are 0 ways to create a rectangular arrays in D dynamically and it
would be great if there were only one, wouldn't it :)

int [][] rect = new int[10][10]; or
int [,] rect = new int[10][10]; or
int [;] rect = new int[10][10]; or anything else!

Drew McCormack <drewmccormack mac.com> writes:

 There are 0 ways to create a rectangular arrays in D dynamically and it
 would be great if there were only one, wouldn't it :)
 
 int [][] rect = new int[10][10]; or
 int [,] rect = new int[10][10]; or
 int [;] rect = new int[10][10]; or anything else!

I agree. I think this would be more logical than the current state of 
affairs where you have static arrays. Static arrays are not needed if 
you can create rectangular arrays on the heap.

int[4][5] a;

could simply be replaced by

int[][] a = new int[4][5];

This would be more consistent with the rest of D, where most things are 
created on the heap.

Drew McCormack

Norbert Nemec <Norbert.Nemec gmx.de> writes:

Drew McCormack wrote:

 
 There are 0 ways to create a rectangular arrays in D dynamically and it
 would be great if there were only one, wouldn't it :)
 
 int [][] rect = new int[10][10]; or
 int [,] rect = new int[10][10]; or
 int [;] rect = new int[10][10]; or anything else!

 
 I agree. I think this would be more logical than the current state of
 affairs where you have static arrays. Static arrays are not needed if
 you can create rectangular arrays on the heap.
 
 int[4][5] a;
 
 could simply be replaced by
 
 int[][] a = new int[4][5];
 
 This would be more consistent with the rest of D, where most things are
 created on the heap.
 
 Drew McCormack

Be careful there! Statically sized arrays are something different from
dynamically sized arrays. int[3] is a different type from int[4], which
again is different from int[], even if that has the dynamic size 4. There
are plenty of uses for statically sized arrays that are created on the
stack (or directly inside of structs and classes) and D definitely needs
both (and - for 1-d already has) both of them well distinguished.

The idea of having
        int[][] a = new int[10][10]
is very misleading. int[][] just is no rectangular array, but a ragged array
(even, if, by chance, all the rows have the same size). If you really want
to extend the language, go for real rectangular arrays, where my suggestion
for a good syntax would be
        int[,] a = new int[10,10]

"Ivan Senji" <ivan.senji public.srce.hr> writes:

"Norbert Nemec" <Norbert.Nemec gmx.de> wrote in message
news:c78ckg$cp2$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Drew McCormack wrote:

 There are 0 ways to create a rectangular arrays in D dynamically and it
 would be great if there were only one, wouldn't it :)

 int [][] rect = new int[10][10]; or
 int [,] rect = new int[10][10]; or
 int [;] rect = new int[10][10]; or anything else!

 I agree. I think this would be more logical than the current state of
 affairs where you have static arrays. Static arrays are not needed if
 you can create rectangular arrays on the heap.

 int[4][5] a;

 could simply be replaced by

 int[][] a = new int[4][5];

 This would be more consistent with the rest of D, where most things are
 created on the heap.

 Drew McCormack

 Be careful there! Statically sized arrays are something different from
 dynamically sized arrays. int[3] is a different type from int[4], which
 again is different from int[], even if that has the dynamic size 4. There
 are plenty of uses for statically sized arrays that are created on the
 stack (or directly inside of structs and classes) and D definitely needs
 both (and - for 1-d already has) both of them well distinguished.

 The idea of having
         int[][] a = new int[10][10]
 is very misleading. int[][] just is no rectangular array, but a ragged

array
 (even, if, by chance, all the rows have the same size). If you really want
 to extend the language, go for real rectangular arrays, where my

suggestion
 for a good syntax would be
         int[,] a = new int[10,10]

Exactly what i had in mind. I really hope D gets this because support for
dynamic jagged arrays is great, and this is just one little part that is
missing.
Maybe not for D 1.0 but some later version should really corect this.

Norbert Nemec <Norbert.Nemec gmx.de> writes:

Ivan Senji wrote:
 The idea of having
         int[][] a = new int[10][10]
 is very misleading. int[][] just is no rectangular array, but a ragged

 array
 (even, if, by chance, all the rows have the same size). If you really
 want to extend the language, go for real rectangular arrays, where my

 suggestion
 for a good syntax would be
         int[,] a = new int[10,10]

 
 Exactly what i had in mind. I really hope D gets this because support for
 dynamic jagged arrays is great, and this is just one little part that is
 missing.
 Maybe not for D 1.0 but some later version should really corect this.

I have just started to write up a detailed proposal for multidimensional,
rectangular arrays in D. I have a pretty clear vision for them and hope to
have it all written and uploaded by next week.

"Ivan Senji" <ivan.senji public.srce.hr> writes:

"Norbert Nemec" <Norbert.Nemec gmx.de> wrote in message
news:c7a7q3$6fi$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Ivan Senji wrote:
 The idea of having
         int[][] a = new int[10][10]
 is very misleading. int[][] just is no rectangular array, but a ragged

 array
 (even, if, by chance, all the rows have the same size). If you really
 want to extend the language, go for real rectangular arrays, where my

 suggestion
 for a good syntax would be
         int[,] a = new int[10,10]

 Exactly what i had in mind. I really hope D gets this because support


for
 dynamic jagged arrays is great, and this is just one little part that is
 missing.
 Maybe not for D 1.0 but some later version should really corect this.

 I have just started to write up a detailed proposal for multidimensional,
 rectangular arrays in D. I have a pretty clear vision for them and hope to
 have it all written and uploaded by next week.

Really GREAT :)
I hope Walter reads it and likes it!!