Liberty Eiffel - Tasks: task #12653, implement named TUPLE elements
You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.
task #12653: implement named TUPLE elements
Submitter: | Cyril Adrian <cadrian> | ||
Submitted: | Fri 07 Jun 2013 07:48:12 AM UTC | ||
Should Start On: | Thu 06 Jun 2013 10:00:00 PM UTC | Should be Finished on: | Thu 06 Jun 2013 10:00:00 PM UTC |
Category: | SmartEiffel | Priority: | 5 - Normal |
Status: | None | Assigned to: | None |
Percent Complete: | 0% | Open/Closed: | Open |
Fixed Release: | None | Planned Release: | None |
Effort: | 0.00 |
No files currently attached
Depends on the following items: None found
Items that depend on this one: None found
Carbon-Copy List
There are 0 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.
No changes have been made to this item
Powered by Savane 3.13-d3ae.
Corresponding source code
https://github.com/LibertyEiffel/Liberty/issues/61
Allow named TUPLE elements as defined by ECMA chapter 7.12 Tuples and agents:
It is also possible in the tuple type declaration to label the components, as in TUPLE[x: A; y: B; z: C], making it simpler to access the elements, as in your_tuple.y, with the proper type, here B, rather than your_tuple.item(2) of type ANY by default.
This is not much more than what already is in Liberty with item_x and set_item_x, but with user defined names.
I think this is a nice feature, which does not violate the simple language principles of Eiffel.
We shall document this on the wiki.
I also think it would be good to have a wiki page for "EMCA - What Liberty does (not) (yet) implement".
What do you think?
I think we should NOT implement this for Adler and decide after the Adler release whether we want it in Bell. I could imagine a "virtual" milestone "later" for exactly this type of feature requests. Or should we just assign it to bell and keep the option to move it to a later release when working on bell? Or is "no milestone assigned" exactly this?