Not really. I've had them public in my classes, Microsoft has them public in their classes so it must be alright. Then again it does break the law of encapsulation, so Object-Oriented purists would say the data members *have* to be private.
I'd say its down to coding style, I think the public data members are more elegant ( theVec.x instead of theVec.X() ), and it's unlikely a vector class would ever change after its completed. Then again if it were to change...
x y z or float p[3]
Quote:Original post by Black Knight
another problem when overloading [] is when I have a array of vectors lets say
Vector_3 *pVertices = new Vector_3[1000];
not If i want to reach the 500 vertex
pVertices[500] but this will call the overloaded [] right??What will happen?
No, it would call the array as normal. To call the overload you would do something like:
Vector_3 *pVertices = new Vector_3[1000];pVertices[500][0] = 2.30f;The array acts like a 2d array, the [500] references the vector to edit, the [0] references the x in the 500th vector. You could also do this:
pVertices[500].x = 2.30f;pVertices[500] = Vector_3( 2.30f, 0.00f, 1.00f );Assuming a constructor existed that took 3 floats.
wrt to union vs operator, I personally prefer to take the best of both worlds
The inner-struct is there to prevent the union from making x, y and z a single variable. Without it, x=y=z=p[0], which isn't what you want.
class Vector_3 { public: union { struct { float x, y, z; }; float p[3]; }; float&operator [](int index) { return p[index]; } };Quote:Original post by Black Knight
Doh yea unions.
Well unions share the same memory as far as i know.So Im not wasting any memory for it its the same as 3 floats?
And whats the purpose of the struct inside the class cant i just have :class Vec3{public: union{ float x,y,z; float p[3]; };};
This seems to work.
The inner-struct is there to prevent the union from making x, y and z a single variable. Without it, x=y=z=p[0], which isn't what you want.
m:\OddProject\Source\MogsIsland\Maths\Vector3.inl(18): error C2440: 'return' : cannot convert from 'const Real' to 'Real &'
Throws my const correctness out.
Throws my const correctness out.
Author
I tried to make some template funcs then i removed them but I get errors now like this
C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\include\xutility(572) : error C2039: 'iterator_category' : is not a member of 'Vector_4'
d:\st projects (source)\stlibs\stengine\math\Vector.h(128) : see declaration of 'Vector_4'
.\Drawable.cpp(142) : see reference to class template instantiation 'std::iterator_traits<_Iter>' being compiled
with
[
_Iter=Vector_4
]
I dunno how to fix them.Any idea?
C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\include\xutility(572) : error C2039: 'iterator_category' : is not a member of 'Vector_4'
d:\st projects (source)\stlibs\stengine\math\Vector.h(128) : see declaration of 'Vector_4'
.\Drawable.cpp(142) : see reference to class template instantiation 'std::iterator_traits<_Iter>' being compiled
with
[
_Iter=Vector_4
]
I dunno how to fix them.Any idea?
Quote:Original post by TheOddMan
I'd say its down to coding style, I think the public data members are more elegant ( theVec.x instead of theVec.X() ), and it's unlikely a vector class would ever change after its completed. Then again if it were to change...
My view is that 'theVec.X()' generally (a) adds extra useless complexity and (b) is effectively lying. Real classes can perform more useful things, anyway. This sort of function is just adding a useless 'hook' for invariant-maintaining code and then (in practice) never filling it in.
Author
Ok another useless question :)
lets say i have this
Now what happens if I call it from my app like this??
vector3 = normalize(&(vector1 - vector2));
It does not give a compile error but what address does it send to the function??
Sorry for the Qs :]
lets say i have this
Vector_3 normalize(const Vector_3 *pNormal){float mag = pNormal->magnitude();Vector_3 vNormal = Vector_3(pNormal->x / mag,pNormal->y / mag,pNormal->z / mag);return vNormal;}Now what happens if I call it from my app like this??
vector3 = normalize(&(vector1 - vector2));
It does not give a compile error but what address does it send to the function??
Sorry for the Qs :]
Don't do that, is the short answer. Instead, make them friend functions, and pass by reference:
Edit: I should probably mention that you use them like ordinary functions (well, they are ordinary functions, just with special permissions, really). Like so:
class Vector3{ // friend functions can access the members of the classes they're // declared as friends in inline friend float Magnitude(const Vector3& v) { return sqrt(v.x * v.x + v.y * v.y + v.z * v.z); } inline friend Vector3 Normalize(const Vector3& v) { float m = Magnitude(v); return v / m; } // likewise for CrossProduct: inline friend Vector3 CrossProduct(const Vector3& lhs, const Vector3& rhs) { return Vector3( lhs.y * rhs.z - lhs.z * rhs.y, lhs.z * rhs.x - lhs.x * rhs.z, lhs.x * rhs.y - lhs.y * rhs.x ); }};Edit: I should probably mention that you use them like ordinary functions (well, they are ordinary functions, just with special permissions, really). Like so:
int main(){ Vector3 v = CrossProduct(v1, v2);}
Just use references:
Vector_3 normalize(const Vector_3& normal){ float invMag = 1.0f/normal.magnitude(); return Vector3(normal.x*invMag, normal.y*invMag, normal.z*invMag);}
When you call (vector1 - vector2) a temporary instance of class Vector_3 is created, and the function gets the address of this temporary. Now passing the address of a temporary is not the best idea, as you might imagine...
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement