Phil Endecott wrote:
Joel de Guzman wrote:
Phil Endecott wrote:
* xyz or [n] notation: using .x, .y and .z to access the coordinates seems simpler to me, but the higher-dimension people would prefer to use [0], [1] ... [n]. That notation also has the advantage that you can iterate through the dimensions. Is it possible to support both? Yes! Use fusion to do the mapping, making all your structs, arrays or whatnots, whatever they are, compatible.
I was imagining something more lightweight, like a union...
There's also the possibility of simply defining implicit conversions between the two styles.
But a better solution would be to decide from the outset that one
style
is "right" and the other is "wrong", so only one needs to be supported and no conversions are needed. (I mean that partly tongue-in-cheek.)
Have a look at:
http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id&1920
- Michael Marcin
What is not lightweight about the get<0>(pt) syntax? Doesn't it compile away? Is the issue a dependency on another library -- because the get<0>(pt) syntax seems really easy to provide without bothering with Fusion. i.e. template <int Index> float get(MyPoint & p) {return p[Index];} OR template <> float get<0>(MyPoint & p) {return p.x;} -- John