BitArray new design

[Dmitry Olshansky]

11-Jan-2013 00:33, Era Scarecrow пишет:
> On Thursday, 10 January 2013 at 20:11:38 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
>> You want to mixin a definition of a inner struct BitString into each
>> bit array?
>
>   That was the idea, yes.
>
>> Or include all of functions of BitString to be mixed into BitArray?
>>
>> If the latter then:
>
>   Well it seems like it should work, that it should include a silent
> pointer to the original BitArray (container) similar like delegates do
> for functions. Odd that it doesn't.  Bug?

It's only for classes AFAIK. Inner structs of structs (LOL) don't have it.

>
>   Seems with the problem on that, I'll do a different approach.
>
>   BitArray(StorageType) {
>     StorageType memory;
>
>     //now we do memory.length =, and memory.rawBulk[] for direct access,
> may
>     //add opIndex removing the need to know rawBulk at all
>   }
>
>   StorageType in this case should contain 'rawBulk', and the storage
> type handles the memory allocation, giving access to members no
> different than an array. I have two storage types i've written that
> hopefully handle all cases:
>
> //storage types for BitArrays
> struct Dynamic {
>    size_t[] rawBulk;
>    alias rawBulk this;
> }
>
> struct Fixed(int maxBits) {
>    size_t[maxBits / (size_t.sizeof * 8)] rawBulk;
>    int _length;    //fixed sizes are usually going to be rather small
>
>    int length() @property const @safe pure nothrow {
>        return _length;
>    }
>    void length(int setSize) @property const @safe pure nothrow {
>        assert(setSize < rawBulk.length);
>        _length = setSize;
>    }
>    void reserve(size_t resSize) {} //fixed
> }
>
>   Now when modifying memory referencing just treat memory as an array,
> access the raw data via rawBulk (likely will remove named access and go
> with opIndex). This removes the need for several workarounds I have
> currently. while trying to handle compact/allocated memory.

Sounds good and seductively simple.

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky