From: Andreas Launila <ruby-talk@...>
Date: 2007-06-07T17:58:49+09:00
Subject: Re: Gecode/R - Request for syntax feedback

Andreas Launila wrote:
> James Edward Gray II wrote:
>> On Jun 6, 2007, at 12:35 PM, Andreas Launila wrote:
>>> Something more on the form of the rest of the syntax
>>> would probably be
>>>
>>> constrain element(array, x).equal(y)
>>>
>>> It just doesn't read as well to me. Maybe there's a better way of
>>> representing constraints where the function has to take multiple
>>> arguments, such as returning an helper with only one method, i.e. as
>>> follows.
>>>
>>> constrain element(x).in(array).equal(y)
>> I would say avoiding core class modification is important.  If that
>> means we need element(), that's probably just a price we need to pay, in
>> my opinion.
>>
>> See my earlier comment about proxy objects for another option though.
>>
> 
> I will write up some similar syntax examples with proxy objects to see
> how big the difference is.
> 

Examples: http://gecoder.lokorin.org/dev/wiki/Syntax_test#Proxy_objects

I have assumed that it's in this case okay to shadow methods such as
#sort since if the enum is passed to a wrapping method then it should
only be used with finite-domain variables, which do not have any defined
way of comparison (similarly for min and max).

-- 
Andreas Launila