Talk:Create a two-dimensional array at runtime: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(Demonstrating a languages normal array-creation features is fine) |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
: because for that dim2 would have to be a compile time constant. It ''would'' be a solution if you dropped the requirement that ''both'' dimensions are given at run time. --[[User:Ce|Ce]] 12:41, 11 January 2008 (MST) |
: because for that dim2 would have to be a compile time constant. It ''would'' be a solution if you dropped the requirement that ''both'' dimensions are given at run time. --[[User:Ce|Ce]] 12:41, 11 January 2008 (MST) |
||
:: This sort of task suggests a limit to the chrestomathy format for language comparison. Perhaps programming languages with dynamic orientation should be excluded from this sort of task, as such languages cannot demonstrate anything other than their normal array-creation features? How might we identify language features so that statuses like "impossible" or "not applicable" could be clear? --[[User:TBH|TBH]] 15:12, 11 January 2008 (MST) |
:: This sort of task suggests a limit to the chrestomathy format for language comparison. Perhaps programming languages with dynamic orientation should be excluded from this sort of task, as such languages cannot demonstrate anything other than their normal array-creation features? How might we identify language features so that statuses like "impossible" or "not applicable" could be clear? --[[User:TBH|TBH]] 15:12, 11 January 2008 (MST) |
||
::: Demonstrating a languages normal array-creation features is fine for dynamic language examples. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 05:17, 16 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== AutoIT Incorrect? == |
== AutoIT Incorrect? == |
||