On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:11:55 -0400, Rainer Deyke <[email protected]>
wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Why not?
private Optional!double cached_x;
private bool cachex_valid;
private Optional!double cached_y;
private bool cachey_valid;
Because that's horribly non-orthogonal code. I go by the rule that
whenever two pieces of data are more closely associated with each other
members of the enclosing data structure, then those pieces of data must
be factored out into their own data structure. *Especially* if, as in
this case, the resulting data structure is reusable.
Sure, do whatever you want for your *private data members*. I see too
much value in Optional!T being aliased to the underlying T to go for the
completely generic solution which requires special syntax to get at the T.
-Steve
