[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Date Index][Thread Index]
DiscreteIntervals and DiscreteIntervalUnions
- To: <xtech>
- Subject: DiscreteIntervals and DiscreteIntervalUnions
- From: Hugh Hoover <heh>
- Date: Mon, 13 Nov 89 22:30:54 PST
- Cc: <dean>, <markm>, <ravi>
I really really really really really want these 2 region classes to have
a mostly common protocol that is slightly larger than DiscreteRegion.
Most especially, I want them both to have lowerBound and upperBound messages,
and that I be able to declare a (single) class that has these.
We can either have (another) common superclass for these, or make one
a subclass of the other. I think I prefer the latter, and suggest that
DiscreteIntervalUnion be a subclass of DiscreteInterval. It seems that the
union is a reasonably natural extension of the basic interval. The main
distinguishing factor between them would be isSimple(), and what you got
back from the simpleRegions message.