Not really an article or anything - this was planned as just a
post to this newsgroup, but I decided to put it somewhere
suitable for larger blocks of text with formatting:
http://blog.thecybershadow.net/2013/07/28/low-overhead-components/
For a hashtable to know about its container is probably more
wasteful than having a pointer to the allocator. If you don't
like deep nesting, write a shortcut function, which will do the
entire job for you similar to the read function:
http://dlang.org/phobos/std_file.html#.read
On 7/27/13 11:20 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
Not really an article or anything - this was planned as just a post to
this newsgroup, but I decided to put it somewhere suitable for larger
blocks of text with formatting:
http://blog.thecybershadow.net/2013/07/28/low-overhead-components/
Nice
BTW, there's no fast way to boundcheck two-ptr range. It should
work similar to opSlice:
T opIndex(size_t index)
{
static if (CHECKED)
assert(index < end-ptr);
return *(ptr + index);
}
On Sunday, 28 July 2013 at 12:31:46 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
For a hashtable to know about its container is probably more
wasteful than having a pointer to the allocator.
Why? The difference is one indirection. Are you referring to the
impact of template bloat and code cache misses?
If you don't
On Sunday, 28 July 2013 at 18:51:15 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
BTW, there's no fast way to boundcheck two-ptr range. It should
work similar to opSlice:
T opIndex(size_t index)
{
static if (CHECKED)
assert(index < end-ptr);
return *(ptr + index);
}
That's a bug, thanks. But non-release-build
-overhead-components/
BTW, slightly off-topic, but could you clarify something for me?
In the phrase "I understand that STL allocators are stateless,
which is boring ", does the expression "I understand that" mean
"I think the following is true, but I'm not sure" or
On 7/27/13 11:20 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
Not really an article or anything - this was planned as just a post to
this newsgroup, but I decided to put it somewhere suitable for larger
blocks of text with formatting:
http://blog.thecybershadow.net/2013/07/28/low-overhead-components/
Vote
On 7/27/2013 11:20 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
Not really an article or anything - this was planned as just a post to this
newsgroup, but I decided to put it somewhere suitable for larger blocks of text
with formatting:
http://blog.thecybershadow.net/2013/07/28/low-overhead-components
://blog.thecybershadow.net/2013/07/28/low-overhead-components/
Please include your name as author on this!
Fixed, thanks. I wasn't sure if the post was ready for Reddit, as
it's mainly some thoughts written down for advanced D users.
Fixed, thanks. I wasn't sure if the post was ready for Reddit,
as it's mainly some thoughts written down for advanced D users.
Thanks for writing this. Aside from the primary purpose of the
article, I was able to learn along the way more about D's mixins
because of it.
As a game architect, I
On 28-7-2013 08:20, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
Not really an article or anything - this was planned as just a post to
this newsgroup, but I decided to put it somewhere suitable for larger
blocks of text with formatting:
http://blog.thecybershadow.net/2013/07/28/low-overhead-components/
I do
On Tuesday, 30 July 2013 at 12:37:26 UTC, Faux Amis wrote:
I do not understand what this code should help with:
struct LAYER(BASE)
{
BASE base;
// ... use base ...
}
Any advice on what I should read to get it?
(no C++ exp)
It is meant to do "has-a" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Has-a)
-overhead-components/
On topic of proposals: what to you think about embedding context
pointer into struct when such alias is used? That will require
some enforcement from compiler if template instance will be
actually used as member field in same struct but avoid template
bloat and fits with existing
formatting:
http://blog.thecybershadow.net/2013/07/28/low-overhead-components/
On topic of proposals: what to you think about embedding
context pointer into struct when such alias is used? That will
require some enforcement from compiler if template instance
will be actually used as member field in
On 30-7-2013 14:48, Dicebot wrote:
On Tuesday, 30 July 2013 at 12:37:26 UTC, Faux Amis wrote:
I do not understand what this code should help with:
struct LAYER(BASE)
{
BASE base;
// ... use base ...
}
Any advice on what I should read to get it?
(no C++ exp)
It is meant to do "has-a"
On Tuesday, 30 July 2013 at 14:21:55 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev
wrote:
While not a bad proposal in itself, it's not very interesting
in terms of performance. If we are to do pointers, then
pointers to the lower layer aren't much harder to do by hand
and save you the ECX (this pointer) adjustment w
On Tuesday, 30 July 2013 at 14:33:59 UTC, Faux Amis wrote:
like this:?
struct LAYER(BASE)
{
BASE base;
// ... use base ...
void func(){};
}
struct Base
{
alias LAYER!(Base) Layer;
Layer layer;
layer.base = this;
layer.func();
// ...
}
On Sunday, 28 July 2013 at 21:03:43 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
Why? The difference is one indirection. Are you referring to
the impact of template bloat and code cache misses?
bloat
Yes, but you still need to write it.
That's what we do.
You need to write it anyway to provide simple int
On 30-7-2013 17:22, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Tuesday, 30 July 2013 at 14:33:59 UTC, Faux Amis wrote:
like this:?
struct LAYER(BASE)
{
BASE base;
// ... use base ...
void func(){};
}
struct Base
{
alias LAYER!(Base) Layer;
Layer layer;
layer.base = this;
layer.fu
On Tuesday, 30 July 2013 at 15:57:50 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Sunday, 28 July 2013 at 21:03:43 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev
wrote:
Why? The difference is one indirection. Are you referring to
the impact of template bloat and code cache misses?
bloat
In most cases, only one template instance will be
On Tuesday, 30 July 2013 at 16:48:42 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev
wrote:
In most cases, only one template instance will be "hot" at one
time, so I don't think it would be a problem in general.
You need to load templates from disk. I'm thinking about Adobe
products, though I don't know why they're s
On Wednesday, 31 July 2013 at 08:04:35 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Tuesday, 30 July 2013 at 16:48:42 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev
wrote:
In most cases, only one template instance will be "hot" at one
time, so I don't think it would be a problem in general.
You need to load templates from disk.
Loaded
23 matches
Mail list logo
