Re: Processing array subsections, a newbie question.

[Phil Thornley <phil.jpthornley@gmail.com>]

On 13 June, 19:39, Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
<yannick_duch...@yahoo.fr> wrote:
> Le Sun, 13 Jun 2010 18:57:14 +0200, Phil Thornley  
> <phil.jpthorn...@gmail.com> a écrit:> In the situation you
> > describe I would define a type (to replace your use of Natural) that
> > has one extra value at the end
>
> I see what you mean, but ...
> Personal feeling: this looks like a trick, would not recommend it. To be  
> short: types should not defined this way. Implementation should be  
> adjusted to specification (a type is a part of a specification) and not  
> the opposite, that is, to adapt specifications (types here) to an  
> implementation.
>

That's quite a severe point of view - I would classify the extra value
as a 'boundary value' as described in AQ&S 5.3.1 on subtypes.

Cheers,

Phil