[m-dev.] for review: use bitsets in quantification

[Fergus Henderson]

On 10-Nov-2000, Simon Taylor <stayl at cs.mu.OZ.AU> wrote:
> 
> Fergus wrote:
> > OK, I'll give up on `..` for now, and go back to just wanting to be
> > able to support a dense_bitset type.  For that type, I need `first'
> > and `last' methods.  I guess it doesn't strictly *need* contiguous
> > to_int values, though.
> 
> I think it's better to leave the `enum' class as it is for now,
> rather than add stuff which may or may not be useful later.
> We can add a `bounded_enum' class derived from `enum'
> for the `enum_first' and `enum_last' methods.
> 
> Here's a relative diff dealing with Fergus' recent review comments.
> I intend to commit this soon, unless anyone objects.

I'm happy with the design, but I object to the use of the name `enum'.
That name should be reserved for something that is actually enumerable, IMHO.

I suggest we use a different name, e.g. `reversible_hash'.

(Any other suggestions for a good name for this type class?)

-- 
Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs.mu.oz.au>  |  "I have always known that the pursuit
                                    |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>  |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-developers mailing list
Post messages to:       mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Administrative Queries: owner-mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Subscriptions:          mercury-developers-request at cs.mu.oz.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------------