[geos-devel] [] vs at()

[Paul Ramsey]

Yury, do you concur? If so, globally commit that change ASAP.
Thanks, Paul

Martin Davis wrote:
>>Everyone, could we have some kind of decision on whether at() is a 
>>requirement? Norman noted that there is a bounds-check in 
>>at() which is 
>>not there in []. Is this check required by the code, or not? 
> 
> 
> My take on this is that using [] should be fine, in spite of the lack of bounds checking.  Since we're working from 
> pretty well debugged Java code, we're pretty safe in assuming that the algorithms do not go zinging off the end of arrays.
> (If they did, the Java code would report bounds exceptions - but it never does).
> 
> Martin Davis, Senior Technical Specialist
> Vivid Solutions Inc.
> Suite #1A-2328 Government Street   Victoria, B.C.   V8T 5G5
> Phone: (250) 385 6040    Fax: (250) 385 6046
> EMail: mbdavis at vividsolutions.com  Web: www.vividsolutions.com
> 
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> geos-devel mailing list
> geos-devel at geos.refractions.net
> http://geos.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
> 


-- 
       __
      /
      | Paul Ramsey
      | Refractions Research
      | Email: pramsey at refractions.net
      | Phone: (250) 885-0632
      \_