>> - In Table 5-1, real type is missing. >[DR>] I think reals should be excluded as an index type The types in Table 5-1 are not the type of the index, but the type of the array element. If you can have an associative array of reals indexed by ints, then Table 5-1 needs to specify the "undefined" value for reals. And reals could be allowed as an index type. They have an equality operator defined, which is all that is required. It would be a bad idea to try to calculate a real value arithmetically and then use it as an index value, due to potential roundoff. However, there are many situations where you could guarantee that a real value used for reading is exactly equal to one used for writing. If potential roundoff error was not a sufficient reason to disallow equality compares for reals, then I don't see why it is sufficient to disallow it as an index type. Steven Sharp sharp@cadence.comReceived on Tue Nov 15 15:38:43 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Nov 15 2005 - 15:40:16 PST