On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 16:40:12 +0200, Julian Bäume <julian@...> wrote:
> On Sunday 05 July 2009 22:34:53 P Zoltan wrote:
>> ... and another note on QuickMatrix and QuickVector: the operators
>> defined on these look like a good candidate for sources of bugs. I'd
>> prefer to change the operators to some methods with same functionality
>> intiutive names. Opinions?
> Well, IMHO, we should provide both ways and state in the documentation,
> the overloaded operators are convenient calls to those functions. We
> abandon this feature of the C++ language and since the semantics of the
> can be made clear to the user of this API, we should provide those
> methods to
> be used in the code. I'd prefer writing "a*b" instead of "a.multiply(b)".
This looks like a good approach. My problem with the operators is the
fact that there are are many types present, with more operators, like:
- scalars (double)
For example, "a*b" could mean multiplication of:
- a vector with a scalar
- a vector with a matrix
- a matrix with another matrix
Similar for the others, so reading code wich uses operators kinda sucks...
> Just my 2ct
> bye then