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
vector
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
application.
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
standard
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)
{
return swizzle!("yxwz")(a);
}
It compiles if I do this changes:
566c566
< foreach(i; 0..N)
---
foreach(int i; 0..N)
574c574
< int i = countUntil(s, swizzleKey[0]);
---
int i = cast(int)countUntil(s, swizzleKey[0]);
591c591
< foreach(j, c; s) // find the offset of the
---
foreach(int j, c; s) // find the offset
of the
