Re: [bug-gawk] useless array length abstraction

[Andrew J. Schorr]

On Sun, Jan 06, 2019 at 07:48:55AM -0700, address@hidden wrote:
> > Will do. Is it OK if the patch to reset the array type to null when the
> > last element is deleted is consolidated in the same patch, or should that
> > be committed separately? And does that one belong in master as well,
> > or might you consider putting it in stable?
> 
> It should probably be a separate patch, since it addresses a different
> issue. Please do it just in master.  THe next release will be from
> there.

OK. I pushed that patch to master. It's impossible to have a test case
without the extended 'typeof' capabilities previously discussed.

> > > > But taking another step back, I'm not sure why these array methods are
> > > > implemented as an array of function pointers instead of as a struct
> > > > with a field for each method.
> > > 
> > > This would be a step forward.  If you can work up a patch for that for
> > > review, I'd appreciate it.
> >
> > I will see how difficult this is.
> 
> Great, thanks.

I sent that patch already.

Regards,
Andy