> The thing I would like to add here is that I found it very confusing > (but am used to it now) that Class within the compiler means > - reference > - record > - class > - tuple > > I don't philosophically disagree with 'things with fields' being > grouped into one AST element, but that AST element should be > called "Aggregate" or "Container" or something, not Class...
Not so long ago, there was agreement to make this change on the mailing list, but then nobody ever did it. I'll add it to our task list (unless you want to take it on). I don't remember what term we converged on the last time this was discussed, but it may not be hard to find in the archives (or perhaps someone else remembers). > And along the same lines, I don't think that reference belongs > in the "Aggregate" group, since it only ever holds one element. I think this is an offshoot of how the compiler implements references -- by using a class with a single value to represent the "pointer-to-value" concept. I believe the goal was to unify cases in the compiler related to pointer-/alias-analysis. I'm not opposed to moving away from this, but suspect it would be a pretty big undertaking. Maybe it would fall out fairly directly if we're successful in making the change proposed here... not sure. -Brad ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services. Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between. Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Chapel-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/chapel-developers
