(fully qualified) names of basic types
Kevin Reid <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.e.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
We recently had a discussion on IRC about what the FQNs of the basic types such as integer, float, string, etc. should be on E implementations that are not Java-based, since it would be inappropriate to use java.lang.*. We decided to use org.erights.e.elib.atom.*. Further question: What are the *names* of these two types: Int or Integer? Char or Character? Allen Short and I would prefer the latter options. [12:49] dash: i'd lean towards the former [12:50] dash: on reflection "Integer" and "Character" seem better choices [12:50] dash: my first thought was that 'Int' and 'Char' reflect the limitations of the C types of the same names [12:51] dash: char currently shares some of those, integers don't [12:52] dash: conceivably, future implementations would not have a fixed-width restriction for characters either [12:52] dash: so invoking that resemblance wouldn't be helpful -- Kevin Reid <http://homepage.mac.com/kpreid/>