[Cuis-dev] [Integrated] Should we rename these? Re: support for variable indexable subclasses of 8/16/32/64 bits

[Juan Vuletich]

On 5/21/2019 2:44 PM, Luciano Notarfrancesco via Cuis-dev wrote:
> This changeset adds support for variableDoubleByte and 
> variableDoubleWord subclasses in Spur images, following the same 
> method name conventions used in Squeak (except Behaviour>>isLongs and 
> isShorts that I replaced with isDoubleBytes and isDoubleWords to be  
> more consistent and avoid the ambiguity of 'long' and 'short'). It 
> includes classes DoubleByteArray and DoubleWordArray just as Squeak.
>
> I need this in my project in order to support compact representations 
> for some objects that are performance-critical (permutations, 
> tuples/matrices/polynomials over Z/nZ, elements of finite fields, 
> etc), and to later be able to easily improve performance adding a few 
> primitives.
>
> Please review and let me know what you think.

Very nice! I just integrated your support for these new formats as 
updates (changesets). But the classes themselves, DoubleByteARray and 
DoubleWordArray, I made them into a new package, that can only be used 
with Spur images.

Folks, these names are getting confusing. I think we'd name them better. 
What about ByteArray, SignedByteArray, Int16Array, SignedInt16Array, 
Int32Array, SignedInt32Array, Int64Array, SignedInt64Array, 
Float32Array,  Double64Array, SignedPoint16Array and SignedPoint32Array?

Thanks,

-- 
Juan Vuletich
www.cuis-smalltalk.org
https://github.com/Cuis-Smalltalk/Cuis-Smalltalk-Dev
https://github.com/jvuletich
https://www.linkedin.com/in/juan-vuletich-75611b3
@JuanVuletich