Re: disjoint ranges ?

["Ehud Lamm" <mslamm@mscc.huji.ac.il>]

O agree with you on the "bigger abstraction" description.  I didn't want to
go into all the  details: explaining why disjoint ranges are what I'd call
"over abstractig" (you should remember to think about implementaion costs,
from time to time...)

That's why I referred to previous discussions here.

--
Ehud Lamm   mslamm@mscc.huji.ac.il
http://purl.oclc.org/NET/ehudlamm <==  Me!



Pat Rogers <progers@NOclasswideSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:z6rF5.45$bz5.65618@nnrp3.sbc.net...
> "Ehud Lamm" <mslamm@mscc.huji.ac.il> wrote in message
> news:8s59nu$ej4$1@news.huji.ac.il...
>
> > This should be in the FAQ! It was discussed several time here (try
> Deja).
>
> Agreed.
>
> > You might find this illuminating:
> > http://www.adapower.com/lang/rangewholes.html
>
> Yes, I know about that; I find it rather complex**.  In any case it is
> an example of what I called "a bigger abstraction".
>
> ** As I understand it, in LanguageLawyerSpeak that is read as "I don't
> like it."  ;-)
>
>
>
> > Pat Rogers <progers@NOclasswideSPAM.com> wrote in message
> > news:DhpF5.178$AR3.40313@nnrp2.sbc.net...
> > > "Philippe Torres" <ptorres@laas.fr> wrote in message
> > > news:39E612C9.9BF98CD3@laas.fr...
> > > > A very dumb question but i can't find the right syntax so here i
> am.
> > > > How can i declare a type or subtype with a disjoint range ?
> > >
> > > All too easy to answer -- you can't.
> > >
> > > Generally for that kind of thing you need a bigger abstraction,
> either
> > > a "bag" or a set.
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Patrick Rogers                      Consulting and Training in:
> > > http://www.classwide.com      Deadline Schedulability Analysis
> > > progers@classwide.com        Software Fault Tolerance
> > > (281)648-3165                       Real-Time/OO Languages
> > >
> > > Adam ... does not deserve all the credit; much is due to Eve, the
> > > first woman, and Satan, the first consultant.
> > > Mark Twain
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>