From: Douglas Gregor (gregod_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-02 08:43:46
On Friday 02 August 2002 12:01 am, Andrew J Bromage wrote:
> G'day all.
> On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 10:55:23PM -0400, Douglas Gregor wrote:
> > I see that the naming of 'indeterminate' might be an issue, then. I need
> > the tribool in the domain of static analysis, where the third value means
> > "I can't statically determine if this boolean value is true or false, so
> > the value is indeterminate at compile-time". I'm not overly attached to
> > the name 'indeterminate', and 'maybe' is a lot shorter...
> Well if it's static analysis that you're doing, perhaps a better name
> is "bottom".
Potentially, yes, but then one might expect "top" as well. At that point we
might as well just create the boolean lattice instead of a simple 3-state
> Now that I think about it, would there be any value in a lattice type?
I could see a use of a lattice concept (with, e.g., meet and join functions
defined) and perhaps an adaptor to make a BGL graph into a lattice. I'm not
sure how one would create a lattice type -- most useful lattices tend to be
infinitely wide, infinitely tall, or both.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk