Never mind objects; we could restate it as .... "LC has no way to handle
lists of arbitrary chunks of data".
Your phrase " ... simple matter of ... return-delimited chunk ..." hides
the the real issue:
what if the chunks of data might contain 'return's ?
You can find another character which is less likely (!!?) - but that
doesn't give you "arbitrary data".
Or you coerce it by encoding / decoding every time you put data into /
out of the list, or <lots of more complicated things>.
But those all make it less than simple, and less than efficient.
And, of course, inserting / deleting from such delimited "pseudo-lists"
is considerably less efficient than the constant time cost you would
expect from "real" lists :-)
-- Alex.
On 12/10/2015 22:51, Richard Gaskin wrote:
Mark Wieder wrote:
> Richard Gaskin <ambassador at ...> writes:
>
>> Given the simplicity of chunk expressions, is that needed?
>
> Absolutely. LiveCode doesn't without additional complexity support
> singly- or doubly-linked listed of arbitrary objects.
I realize extra code is needed to implement linked lists of objects,
my question is whether we need to work that hard to handle chunks of
data in LiveCode.
I may well simply misunderstand the role of his library. I had
thought it was focused on working with data rather than objects, and
if so it would seem a relatively simple matter of maintaining a
pointer into a return-delimited chunk for the "next", "prev", etc.
features he described, along with chunk expressions.
I hadn't considered the possibility of using theses lists to contain
objects, though. Interesting idea, but I'm not sure how I'd use that.
Seems to be a pattern with me today - time for better coffeee.... :)
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
