From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,9c8d43df5d883263
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-02-15 18:05:54 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: mjsilva697@earthlink.net (Mike Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Two Dimensional Array
Date: 15 Feb 2002 18:05:54 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <27085883.0202151805.2c557ce7@posting.google.com>
References: <3c6cf3db.11214605@news.demon.co.uk> <ueljmobm6.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov>
 <3c6d8b32.18156525@news.demon.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.179.216.203
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1013825154 3678 127.0.0.1 (16 Feb 2002 02:05:54
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 Feb 2002 02:05:54 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:20066
Date: 2002-02-16T02:05:54+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

brianc@billybob.demon.co.uk (Brian A Crawford) wrote in message news:<3c6d8b32.18156525@news.demon.co.uk>...
><...>
>My problem is the array is so big and is out of sequence.
> 
> If I had to just place the ones and zeros in the array once only I
> would bite the bullet and get on with it.  But I have to fine tune the
> placements 100 of times.  The consistent thing however is if I could
> define the array out of sequence the groups of 1's and 0's would be in
> small groups of 5 numbers (not consequtive numerically but
> consequtively placed.
> To use your example again 3,1,2 ; 1,2,5 and 2,5,4 etc would be the
> small groupings inside the array.  The fact that it is so big is the
> headache. Then I may be able to call the 1,2,5 : AN and the 2,5,4 :BN
> etc,and just fine tune by moving the AN's and BN's etc around like a
> kind of shorthand for each block of 1's ,defining others=> 0.

How about starting with an empty array and then using a procedure to
set the '1's?  The procedure would be driven with data from another
array which holds the 5-sets (?) to be set.  This way you move from
the cumbersome notation of filling in bits of a sparse array to simply
filling in a fully-packed array with your sets of out-of-sequence
coordinates.

Mike