Lubomir Bourdev wrote:
Thus, pixel references (for both types of pixels) yields "pixel<>" objects as a closest match to a "pixel rvalue", even though in the case of a planar pixel such object is really a deep copy of the pixels color.
In the case of a planar pixel we also use the same object for rvalue and lvalue - the planar reference.
Ha OK
It is not a deep copy of the pixel's color (it contains references to each channel), but it is convertible to a deep copy.
Right, I knew the planar reference was a not a deep copy. But it is converted to pixel<> right? (because pixel_value_type is that) In which case then? I figured it was when you access an rvalue for the planar pixel.
-------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------
If all that is correct, or mostly correct, then I would suggest:
Yes your description was correct.
(1) rename the pixel<> class as color<>. (2) rename the planar_ptr<> class as planar_pixel_iterator<> (3) rename the planar_ref<> class as planar_pixel_handle<>
I am hesitating to do (1). Using color is very strange when inside the image. Color iterators? Looking at several other libraries I see the terms pixel, pixel iterators, used frequently...
I understand that, but... If you have a planar pixel, there is some operation by which you obtain its *value* as represented by the class pixel<> right? At least that's what I infer from the fact that a planar pixel reference has a nested type named "pixel_value_type" defined to be "pixel<>". But that pixel<> object, when obtained from a planar pixel, is representing its color isn't it? I mean, it's not *the* pixel AFAICT. In contains copies of the channel values. So the class used for _this_ should be named color<> IMO. But well, I can see the issues in dropping pixel<>. If C++ had template typedef I would suggest to keep both pixel<> and color<>.
(3) Good suggestion, but maybe we could change to planar_pixel_reference. I don't want to introduce the term "handle". Reference is already used in this context, for example "reference proxy" object is a common term.
Ya well, OK, I supposed that if the need for just a wrapper is sufficiently explained in advanced then users would know what a pixel reference really is when they see the term. I wouldn't mind if you wanted to use the description I gave about these. :) Best -- Fernando Cacciola SciSoft http://fcacciola.50webs.com/