Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Formal review for QVM
From: Agustín K-ballo Bergé (kaballo86_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-12-14 07:46:48

On 12/13/2015 9:07 PM, Emil Dotchevski wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Agustín K-ballo Bergé <
> kaballo86_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On 12/13/2015 5:13 PM, Emil Dotchevski wrote:
>>> Yes, I'm interested to understand what brought this comment, though I am
>>> not sure that there is a solution. The problem is that QVM can't invoke
>>> constructors (other than the default constructor) for user-defined types,
>>> because different types could have different constructors (believe me,
>>> I've
>>> seen game programmers define some crazy matrix/vector constructors).
>>> Because functions like normalized() operate on user-defined types, they
>>> use
>>> the default constructor to make a local object before returning it by
>>> value.
>> There's always the copy constructor, which I believe is already implicitly
>> required by the library. Have you experimented with this before?
> Actually, there might not be a copy constructor. In QVM views are
> non-copyable. For example the return type of qvm::row and qvm::col, which
> present a row or a column of a matrix as a vector, return non-copyable
> types (which are still valid arguments for the normalized() function in
> question.)

That's odd, views as I know them are copyable and cheaply so, since they
are shallow. I would expect those views you mention not only to be
copyable, but to be trivially-copyable. Could you expand on that?

Anyways, I imagine calling `normalized` with one of those views either
won't return something of that view's type, or it won't
default-construct a view. Am I close here?

> Regardless, the copy constructor can't be used to create a vector from 3
> scalars. Perhaps I misunderstand you.

You say QVM can't invoke constructors other than the default constructor
for user-defined types, but it already does call copy and move
constructors already. Considering that, in the following call:

     myvec3 n = normalized(myvec3(1, 2, 3));

if the compiler says there is an error here because `normalized` needs a
default constructor, I'm gonna start suspecting something wrong is going
on with the library. This is what I would naively expect `normalized` to
be doing:

    template <typename Vec>
    Vec normalized(Vec v) {
      return v /= length(v);

Now I vaguely recall something about being able to explicitly specify
the return type, or specializing some kind of deduction facilities, or
at least another place were one wouldn't have a source value to copy
from, where a default construction would be unsurprising.


Agustín K-ballo Bergé.-

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at