"unsized storage" and "unsized index"

Hi,

In Lush there is the notion of an "unsized storage" (which is
somewhat documented) and the notion of an "unsized index"
(which is not documented). My understanding of these concepts
is as follows:
o a storage with a data pointer equal NULL is unsized
o an index referring to an unsized storage is unsized

Please correct me if that's a misconception.

My first question is: If my definitions are correct then
determining whether a storage or an index is unsized is cheap,
so why are there explicit flags STF_UNSIZED and IDX_UNSIZED?

My second question: Are there any circumstances that require
creating an unsized storage or an unsized index?

I haven't yet encountered a situation where I wanted to
create an unsized storage (or index). OTH, I occasionally find
it useful to set the extent of an index (in one or more
dimensions) to zero (this is not possible in Lush but in
PSU-Lush; I call such an array "empty"--see idx-emptyp).

So I am thinking of getting rid of the "unsized" concepts
altogether because I don't see any benefit and think it would
simplify the code in src/storage.c and src/index.c. (I'm aware
that compiler code is also affected). Please let me if there's
a good reason for keeping these concepts.

Thanks,
Ralf




-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642