[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [xacml] Bags of structured type
On Fri, 2004-03-05 at 10:57, Polar Humenn wrote: > I think you can replace "primitive type(s)" with "datatype(s)" in that > paragraph. The notion of "primitive" is kind of vague anyway, since you > can introduce new 'primitive' types, which are data types. Right. The "primitive type" description is just saying "not a bag or set." Or, as Polar aptly puts it, any types that are representable. For a clear explination of this, look at the last paragraph of A.5. Structed types are certainly allowed in bags. > Unfortunately our Bag function(s) are defined for only primitive types. > So, when you introduce a new data type, you must introduce all functions > that deal with it, such as any "*-set" operations, or any other > "primitive" functions dealing with the types. I don't see how we could do better here. We can only define the type-* function identifiers for the known, standard types. Then you have to hope that the system you use provides the right functionality. In my code, for example, the type-* functions are specifically designed so it's trivial to get them to support any new datatypes you define. The alternative would be to redefine the type-* functions without the type qualifier, so there is only a single is-in (for example) function that operates over all types. This has benefits and drawbacks that we discussed at length before 1.0 came out (this focused around the map function, I think). seth
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]