Proposal to split out the "members" from coreQ (Was: Re: Philosophy of basic Q)

[David Berry]

On Tue, 11 May 2004, Brian Thomas wrote:

> > Also, no one seems to have noticed that CoreQ allows for either arrays or
> > components (parent-child structure) BUT NOT BOTH at the same time!!!
>
> I have noticed. In our original proposal this was called a "quantityset".
> In the implementation I am working on, I have a QuantitySet class which
> only takes members, and a "ListQuantity" class that only takes values.

What is a QuantitySet?

What are "members"?


> 	Look,  we agree on the following :
>
> 	We *do* need a quantity which is a composite of other quantities.

Why? What do you mean by "composite"? Do you mean that the values stored
in the Quantity are themselves Quantities, or that a Quantity holding a
list of 2-D values can be split into a pair of 1-D quantities?

> All that is needed then is to create a QuantitySet/CompositeQuantity
> interface by peeling off the needed methods from coreQ.

Why? What does this give us?


> I don't believe it is too late to revise this to separate out the "member" stuff
> from Core/Standard Q and put it in a separate interface. What do other people
> think?

I think that this is all new stuff which I for one have not seen clearly
defined or justified anywhere. I think you need to start from the
beginning and say clearly what a QuantitySet is and why it is needed.

David


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr David S. Berry    (dsb at ast.man.ac.uk)

STARLINK project		 |	Centre for Astrophysics
(http://www.starlink.ac.uk/)	 |	University of Central Lancashire
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory	 |	PRESTON
DIDCOT				 |	United Kingdom
United Kingdom			 |	PR1 2HE
OX11 0QX                                Tel. 01772 893733
                                             01257 273192