Sohail, On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 08:25:57 +0100, Spencer Collyer wrote:
On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 08:41:58 -0700, Sohail Somani wrote:
The option I came up with was to have a set_limit function on the bounds policy which you would call to define the limits at run time. The only reason I haven't gone ahead and done the work to implement run-time limits as yet is because I'm still not sure about the answers to a few questions:
I think you can have the sparse array implementation have an overloaded constructor that takes an instance of the policy. With a set_limit you may end up having invalid arrays for some length of time.
I think I see what you're getting at here, but given that the policies are used through inheritance I'm not sure it is feasible in my class.
Scratch that last comment. Thinking about it some more this morning I think I now see what you are getting at. We could have a constructor taking (a reference to) an object of the bounds policy class, which simply passes that object to the class's constructor in the initializer list. It's so simple, I don't know why I didn't think of it before. I'll add it to the class interface. Spencer -- <<< Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines >>> 8:08am up 41 days 19:41, 23 users, load average: 0.04, 0.59, 0.88 Registered Linux User #232457 | LFS ID 11703