RE: [sarif] #401: Improved design of address object design

I really think my previous suggestion of
 growthDirection  is the least bad alternative if we decide
NOT
to use
  Nullable<int> . I d modify my proposal to a
  Boolean
growsTowardLowMemory  , default

false .
From:   <>
  On Behalf Of  Larry Golding (Myriad Consulting Inc)

Sent:  Monday, April 29, 2019 11:46 AM
To:  James Kupsch <>; Michael Fanning <>; OASIS SARIF TC Discussion List <>
Subject:  RE: [sarif] #401: Improved design of address object design
  Importance:  High


  I m not as happy as I was a few moments ago. If the  unknown  properties default to
  false , then if you don t populate
 offsetFromParent  (which happens at the top of every parent chain) or
 length  (which can happen anywhere along the parent chain), then you have to remember to set the corresponding  unknown  property. You won t. Of if the  unknown  properties default to
  true , you have to set them to
 false  whenever you  do  populate  offsetFromParent  or
  length . You won t.



Michael  (addressing this question specifically to him because of the SDK impact), I don t see a good alternative to
  Nullable<int> . Please let us know your opinion. Raising to red-bang.


  Larry
From:  Larry Golding (Myriad Consulting Inc)

Sent:  Monday, April 29, 2019 11:37 AM
To:  James Kupsch <  >; Michael Fanning <  >; OASIS SARIF TC Discussion List < 
>
Subject:  RE: [sarif] #401: Improved design of address object design


  I could accept Boolean unknownLength and unknownOffsetFromParent, default false for both.


  I will write it this way and send a draft. I can always change this aspect of the design if the TC objects.


  Larry