[chuck-users] Are array types really classes ?
Cyrille.Damez at laposte.net
Cyrille.Damez at laposte.net
Thu Sep 3 16:28:34 EDT 2009
On Thursday 03 September 2009 01:54:07 Michael Heuer wrote:
> I'm curious, what would you want to extend a float[] for?
Very simple things like (algebraic) vectors, list of probabilities, etc. Of
course I can always make classes that contain just a vector and duplicate
every needed member functions and operators of float[], but that feels a bit
silly .
Moreover, unless there is some way of writing an implicit reference cast
operator from foo to float[] (again, excuse this possibly trivial question, I
am learning), I won't be able to use existing functions that take array
references as parameters directly on foo (I will have to pass the member
foo.content or trivially overload all of them).
Yes I am lazy :)
More information about the chuck-users
mailing list