My guess is that it inserts null pointers into the array as you expand it, which doesn't feel totally unreasonable. For primitives there's usually intuitive default value that the compiler can use, with objects (that need allocated resources for their instances, which could be either the declared type or a subclass), null is the logical default.
On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 10:54 PM, George Locke <[email protected] > wrote: > that works. i'm surprised that the .size method doesn't work, tho, since > it does work on primitive type arrays. I guess there's no instantiation > happening or something... > > Thanks! > > - George > > > On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 4:24 PM, Perry R Cook <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 5. how do you resize an object array? (George Locke) >> >> Here's something that should be useful. >> (from the .pdf ChucK Manual, under Dynamic Arrays, >> there's more there about it) >> >> >> [64, 65, 60, 59] @=> int notes[]; >> >> notes << 58; // notes is [64, 65, 60, 59, 58] >> notes << 60; // notes is [64, 65, 60, 59, 58, 60] >> >> notes.popBack(); // [64, 65, 60, 59, 58] >> >> notes << 64 << 65 << 60; // [64, 65, 60, 59, 58, 64, 65, 60] >> >> _______________________________________________ >> chuck-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users >> > > > _______________________________________________ > chuck-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users > > -- Release me, insect, or I will destroy the Cosmos!
_______________________________________________ chuck-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users
