digitalmars.D.learn - Learn template by math vector class
- Darren (dgrant at kerberos-productions dot com) <Darren_member pathlink.com> Jun 21 2006
- Hasan Aljudy <hasan.aljudy gmail.com> Jun 22 2006
- Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com> Jun 22 2006
- Darren <Darren_member pathlink.com> Jun 22 2006
I am learning about D template details by implementing a static sized vector
class. Opinions on this code (like how to solve the obvious errors) or
alternatives that would be better practice in D would be appreciated:
class vector( T, size_t size )
{
private:
T p[ size ];
public:
this()
{
}
this( T[] q )
in
{
assert( q.length > 0 );
}
body
{
foreach ( size_t i, T v; q )
{
p[ i ] = v;
}
}
T opIndex( size_t i )
in
{
assert( i >= 0 && i < size );
}
body
{
return p[ i ];
}
T opIndexassign( T v, size_t i )
in
{
assert( i >= 0 && i < size );
}
body
{
p[ i ] = v;
return p[ i ];
}
T x() { return p[ 0 ]; }
T y() { return p[ 1 ]; }
T z() { return p[ 2 ]; }
T w() { return p[ 3 ]; }
void x( T v ) { p[ 0 ] = v; }
void y( T v ) { p[ 1 ] = v; }
void z( T v ) { p[ 2 ] = v; }
void w( T v ) { p[ 3 ] = v; }
}
example:
vector!( float, 2 ) 2d_vector;
So the obvious problem is that upon instantiation in the example, z and w
attributes implicitly generate array bounds errors. Is there a form of generic
specification in D that can be applied to solve this?
Jun 21 2006
Darren (dgrant at kerberos-productions dot com) wrote:I am learning about D template details by implementing a static sized vector class. Opinions on this code (like how to solve the obvious errors) or alternatives that would be better practice in D would be appreciated: class vector( T, size_t size ) { private: T p[ size ]; public: this() { } this( T[] q ) in { assert( q.length > 0 ); } body { foreach ( size_t i, T v; q ) { p[ i ] = v; } } T opIndex( size_t i ) in { assert( i >= 0 && i < size ); } body { return p[ i ]; } T opIndexassign( T v, size_t i ) in { assert( i >= 0 && i < size ); } body { p[ i ] = v; return p[ i ]; } T x() { return p[ 0 ]; } T y() { return p[ 1 ]; } T z() { return p[ 2 ]; } T w() { return p[ 3 ]; } void x( T v ) { p[ 0 ] = v; } void y( T v ) { p[ 1 ] = v; } void z( T v ) { p[ 2 ] = v; } void w( T v ) { p[ 3 ] = v; } } example: vector!( float, 2 ) 2d_vector; So the obvious problem is that upon instantiation in the example, z and w attributes implicitly generate array bounds errors. Is there a form of generic specification in D that can be applied to solve this?
I think you can use static if: static if( size < 3 ) //no z component { pragma( msg, "2d vectors don't have a z component" ); //tell compiler to print this msg static assert(false); //halt compiler }
Jun 22 2006
On Thu, 22 Jun 2006, Hasan Aljudy wrote:I think you can use static if: static if( size < 3 ) //no z component { pragma( msg, "2d vectors don't have a z component" ); //tell compiler to print this msg static assert(false); //halt compiler }
Or the even simpler: static assert(size < 3, "2d vectors..."); Later, Brad
Jun 22 2006
In article <e7dgpn$5q$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Hasan Aljudy says...I think you can use static if: static if( size < 3 ) //no z component { pragma( msg, "2d vectors don't have a z component" ); //tell compiler to print this msg static assert(false); //halt compiler }
Wow. Thanks, that just worked, though I did it a bit different... Like this: class vector... { .. static if ( size >= 1 ) { T x() { return p[ 0 ]; } void x( T v ) { p[ 0 ] = v; } } .. } Now is there a way to generalize this pattern with something like mixins? ie. do something like template elementAccessor( name, int index ) { T name() { return p[ index ]; } void name( T v ) { p[ index ] = v; } } mixin elementAccessor!( x, index = 0 ); mixin elementAccessor!( y, index = 1 ); mixin elementAccessor!( z, index = 2 ); mixin elementAccessor!( w, index = 3 );
Jun 22 2006









Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com> 