Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

#Actualfir

Posted 17 August 2013 - 04:48 AM

...

in that struct ignoring the fact that there are 3 more members that need to be changed to keep the struct in a "valid" state.

...

 

 

In c i do not use such approach you mention - as a c++ object as a shield interface for some "its internal state inconsistency" against weak users

(probably I used to  evade internal states in such type modules at all. (I would be must think a little about that to explain the difference)

 

Do not have to fight with that because it does not seem to appear at all.Though I do not work in a team , I never handed a module/c-file to somebody and said  use it such-and-such, so i do not know. But probably as I said I prefer the stateles modules (As speaking of some side-internal-state to spoil)

 

Also I do not use such alone object structures you mention:

I do not used just one of it  - all my data practicaly are few big global tables of instances only - got initialisations but got no  'destruction' at all - when I need container for thousands of bullets which are of short living I use something like a pool of structures in the static array - its quite efficient and clear (though is staticaly limitted to some arbitrary limit - so it is some kind overflow prone)


#2fir

Posted 17 August 2013 - 04:19 AM

...

in that struct ignoring the fact that there are 3 more members that need to be changed to keep the struct in a "valid" state.

...

 

 

In c i do not use such approach you mention - as a c++ object as a shield interface for some "its internal state inconsistency" against weak users

(probably I used to  evade internal states in such type modules at all. (I would be must think a little about that to explain the difference)

 

Do not have to fight with that because it does not seem to appear at all.Though I do not work in a team , I never handed a module/c-file to somebody and said  use it such-and-such, so i do not know. But probably as I said I prefer the stateles modules (As speaking of some side-internal-state to spoil)

 

Also I do not use such alone object structures you mention:

I do not used one of it  - all my data practicaly are few big global tables of instances only - got initialisations but got no  'destruction' at all - when I need container for thousands of bullets which are of short living I use something like a pool of structures in the static array - its quite efficient and clear (though is staticaly limitted to some arbitrary limit - so it is some kind overflow prone)


#1fir

Posted 17 August 2013 - 04:02 AM

...

in that struct ignoring the fact that there are 3 more members that need to be changed to keep the struct in a "valid" state.

...

 

 

In c i do not use such approach you mention - as a c++

object as a shield interface for some "its internal state 

inconsistency" against weak users (probably I used to  evade

internal states in such type modules at all. (I would be

must think a little about that to explain the difference)

Do not have to fight with that becouse it does not appear

at all.Though I do not work in a team , I never handed a module/c-file to somebody and said  use it such-and-such,

so i do not know. But probably as I said I prefer the stateles

modules (As speaking of some side-internal state to spoil)

 

Also I do not use such alone object structures you mention:

I do not used one of it  - all my data practicaly are few big global tables of instances only - got initialisations but got no  

'destruction' at all - when I need container for thousands 

of bullets which are of short living I use somethink like a

pool of structures in the static array - its quite efficient and clear (though is staticaly limitted to some arbitrary limit - so it is some kind overflow prone)


PARTNERS