Initial support for array connectors#8
Conversation
|
Connection semantics and SSV/SSM/... changes to be handled in a separate PR. |
docs/5___ssd.adoc
Outdated
|
|
||
| This optional element specifies one dimension of an array connector. | ||
| If no dimension elements are present in a connector, it is a scalar connector. | ||
| The number of dimension elements in a connector provides the dimensionality of the array. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The number of dimension elements in a connector defines the dimensionality of the array.
| <xs:documentation xml:lang="en"> | ||
| This optional element specifies one dimension of an array connector. | ||
| If no dimension elements are present in a connector, it is a scalar | ||
| connector. The number of dimension elements in a connector provides |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@klausschuch can you explain why you prefer defines?
DagBruck
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree in general, but I had two comments on the feedback from @klausschuch.
5569262 to
f40fdfe
Compare
|
I have moved the dimension elements into common, and added array support for SSV and SSB (SSM should not currently be affected, unless we want to enhance transformations to also provide array shape transformations, but even in this case this would likely go into common). This also adds the capability to provide array values for parameters. I have also implemented the non-controversial subset (0-2) of the connection options of #9, by providing optional startIndices and endIndices attributes on a connection. This currently allows for:
Case 3) (scalar mapped to all elements of an array) could still be allowed, by having no Cases 5) and 6) could be handled by extending the allowed content of the Indices attributes to not only contain indices, but also range expressions, like Another approach would be to handle this in Transformations, i.e. adding ArrayTransformations that do reshaping; this would also apply naturally to parameters, which we currently do not handle (except via mapping to parameter connectors, and then using connections). However it seems a bit overkill to always have to provide an ArrayTransformation for the simple cases 1/2, hence the current approach. |
|
Web meeting 2023-11-24 |
Dimension elements on connectors. More has to be added to specify connection semantics, etc.
Also needs corresponding changes in the SSV/SSM/... side of things.