Add removeByIndex #10
Conversation
| throw new java.lang.IndexOutOfBoundsException(); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| else { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In Lua, table.remove(Array, Index) doesn't support any negative index. Moreover, I find the array in lua is really tricky on some operations, for example, the length of an array with some 'nil' elements is undefined. This brings again the question:
Does this gjavac need to follow exactly all the behaviors of Lua?
To me, the purpose of building this java compiler is to ease the smart contract development on XWC for users, so it makes more sense to simplify the semantics and avoid any undefined behavior. On the other hand, it needs to make sure that the smart contract written in Java works as expected on UVM which is designed to execute Lua code.
Another example is that, the negative numbers can be used as index of array in native Lua, but is it really necessary in the smart contract? If not, why the UvmArray needs to support negative number as index? Can we just simplify the UvmArray so that it works as a normal Java Array?
Anyway, if I were the user of gjavac, I would never think of how a Lua smart contract works, all I care about is that the smart contract that I wrote in Java should work exactly as expected.
This pull request fixes this issue: #2