Re: [boost] [qvm] Terseness of syntax etc.

Subject: Re: [boost] [qvm] Terseness of syntax etc.
From: Emil Dotchevski (emil_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-12-08 16:13:32

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Francois Duranleau <
xiao.bai.xiong_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> I totally agree with all you said. In addition, I would shy away from the
> X,
> Y, Z (and combinations) accessors using capital letters in order to
> avoid clashes with macros
> (I recently hit a clash with a struct member I named B0 and a macro in
> some Android system header; there is no B0 here, but I just want to
> illustrate the protential problem).
>

Swizzling is rendered nearly useless if it requires elaborate syntax or
long names. Currently, if you want the Z and X swapped, you'd use (v,ZYX).

I've considered using lower case but that doesn't work well in the case of
(v,x) since it's quite likely that it'll clash with a local x.

Clashes with macros are possible, but FWIW I've been using this library for
years now and never had a clash (all these names are defined in a separate
header, you don't have to include it if you don't need swizzling.)

Thanks,
Emil