Subject: Re: [geometry] [multi] Merging multi (dispatch)
From: Barend Gehrels (barend_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-05-07 05:09:09
Reacting on my own fragments:
> I would say: the dispatch uses the implementation so the details must
> be available before the dispatch. Multi implementations are currently
> modelled like that.
> There are only 3 algorithms where multi uses dispatch (num_points,
> append, distance). Maybe they should derive from detail and not from
> dispatch, like all others do. So they are exceptions, not "many".
These 3 are explicitly marked by dispatch namespace, calling dispatch
from non-dispatch namespace. Indeed there are more, calling their single
version from dispatch namespace. For some it is indeed quite convenient
that it is modelled like that.
> I don't see the need for separate folders for dispatch.
Having the primary template in a separate file and let all
specializations be more self-contained, having their own implementation
and dispatch specializations, can indeed make the structure more
modular. However, if we go for that (needs more discussions), I really
prefer to postpone this, it requires splitting all files, moving classes
around, maybe even more.
Geometry list run by mateusz at loskot.net