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

[john pfersich]

+1

/*—————————————————-*/
Sent from my iPhone
https://boincstats.com/signature/-1/user/51616339056/sig.png
See https://objectnets.net and https://objectnets.org

> On May 26, 2019, at 22:27, Andres Valloud via Cuis-dev <cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st> wrote:
> 
> Why should accessing bytes differently need copying the bytes into a different class?  The bytes won't change, no?
> 
> VW has a useful abstraction for this, the class UninterpretedBytes. While at first similar to a regular ByteArray, UninterpretedBytes implements things like shortAt:, doubleAt:put: and so on.  Now you need just one class instead of n.
> 
> If those selectors could be named after standard types of fixed length too (like 'uintptr_t'), then great because e.g. nobody says what the size of a C 'long' is.
> 
>> On 5/26/19 13:49, Juan Vuletich via Cuis-dev wrote:
>> 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?
> -- 
> Cuis-dev mailing list
> Cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st
> https://lists.cuis.st/mailman/listinfo/cuis-dev