a at a.com
Mon Feb 6 00:49:15 PST 2012
On Saturday, 4 February 2012 at 23:15:17 UTC, Manu wrote:
> First criticism I expect is for many to insist on a class-style
> library, which I personally think has no place as a low level,
> portable API.
> Everyone has a different idea of what the perfect vector lib
> should look
> like, and it tends to change significantly with respect to its
> I feel this flat API is easier to implement, maintain, and
> understand, and
> I expect the most common use of this lib will be in the back
> end of peoples
> own vector/matrix/linear algebra libs that suit their apps.
> My key concern is with my function names... should I be worried
> about name
> collisions in such a low level lib? I already shadow a lot of
> float functions...
> I prefer them abbreviated in this (fairly standard) way, keeps
> lines of
> code short and compact. It should be particularly familiar to
> anyone who
> has written shaders and such.
I prefer the flat API and short names too.
> Opinions? Shall I continue as planned?
Looks nice. Please do continue :)
You have only run this on a 32 bit machine, right? Cause I tried
to compile this simple example and got some errors about
converting ulong to int:
auto testfun(float4 a, float4 b)
It compiles if I do this changes:
< foreach(i; 0..N)
> foreach(int i; 0..N)
< int i = countUntil(s, swizzleKey);
> int i = cast(int)countUntil(s, swizzleKey);
< foreach(j, c; s) // find the offset of the ---
> foreach(int j, c; s) // find the offset of the
More information about the Digitalmars-d