Difference between revisions of "Datatypes R2 Issue 9"
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
== Introduction == | == Introduction == | ||
| + | Clarify the semantics of Set, Bag and List to allow proper determination of allowed substitutions as extensions and restrictions. | ||
| + | At present, it’s not clear which “collection types” can be substituted. | ||
| − | ? backward compatible. | + | |
| + | ? backward compatible. None. (May identify some existing specifications as non-compliant) | ||
| + | |||
| + | MnM | ||
== Discussion == | == Discussion == | ||
| + | |||
| + | Proposed: | ||
| + | SET<T> restricts BAG<T> | ||
| + | LIST<T> restricts PLIST<T> (see other proposal) | ||
| + | PLIST<T> extends BAG<T> | ||
| + | |||
| + | It’d be really helpful if we clarified what the default collection type is for associations too (suggest BAG). Also need to identify how immutability and cardinality apply differently to the collection types than they do to other datatypes. | ||
There is no unique hierarchical relationship between those. What is the use case? --[[User:Gschadow|Gschadow]] 01:13, 25 Jun 2006 (CDT) | There is no unique hierarchical relationship between those. What is the use case? --[[User:Gschadow|Gschadow]] 01:13, 25 Jun 2006 (CDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | BOF: No | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | == Disposition == | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Status == | ||
| + | |||
| + | Proposed | ||
== Links == | == Links == | ||
Back to [[Data Types R2 issues]] | Back to [[Data Types R2 issues]] | ||
Revision as of 03:39, 12 January 2007
Contents
Data Types Issue 9: Clarify BAG-SET-LIST relationship
Introduction
Clarify the semantics of Set, Bag and List to allow proper determination of allowed substitutions as extensions and restrictions. At present, it’s not clear which “collection types” can be substituted.
? backward compatible. None. (May identify some existing specifications as non-compliant)
MnM
Discussion
Proposed: SET<T> restricts BAG<T> LIST<T> restricts PLIST<T> (see other proposal) PLIST<T> extends BAG<T>
It’d be really helpful if we clarified what the default collection type is for associations too (suggest BAG). Also need to identify how immutability and cardinality apply differently to the collection types than they do to other datatypes.
There is no unique hierarchical relationship between those. What is the use case? --Gschadow 01:13, 25 Jun 2006 (CDT)
BOF: No
Disposition
Status
Proposed
Links
Back to Data Types R2 issues
