Hi Lubomir, thanks for the long reply. I really appreciate this. I think we have both made our points clear. Now I'd like to hear the opinion of others...
And finally, DataAccessor is an interesting idea worthy of investigation, but it spans beyond images. The right way to approach this, in my opinion, is to try to make the case for DataAccessors as an addition to the standard. If DataAccessors are accepted, lots of my objections will no longer hold.
Exactly. But my favourite solution would be to extend the language so that one could implement separate lvalue and rvalue versions of operator* and operator[] (similar to the pre- and postfix increment operator). But I don't know whether this is possible, especially considering backward compatibility. Best regards Ulli -- ________________________________________________________________ | | | Ullrich Koethe Universitaet Hamburg / University of Hamburg | | FB Informatik / Dept. of Informatics | | AB Kognitive Systeme / Cognitive Systems Group | | | | Phone: +49 (0)40 42883-2573 Vogt-Koelln-Str. 30 | | Fax: +49 (0)40 42883-2572 D - 22527 Hamburg | | Email: u.koethe@computer.org Germany | | koethe@informatik.uni-hamburg.de | | WWW: http://kogs-www.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/~koethe/ | |________________________________________________________________|