Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #80770
| From | Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" |
| Date | 2021-08-03 12:16 +0000 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <sebc3i$a4v$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | (6 earlier) <0d40ea68-6b4f-4ac9-bdda-47f280aa3b84n@googlegroups.com> <se5lug$vfo$1@gioia.aioe.org> <c87155ac-7fc1-4607-af90-473af3082efan@googlegroups.com> <se8h2t$699$1@gioia.aioe.org> <cb325942-f16d-406c-935b-742d3225ba49n@googlegroups.com> |
?? Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> wrote: > Feels rather unlikely that we want to do anything with such Vertex instance > in separation. Instead we want those to be processed (in massive > amounts) by some rendering engine (like OpenGL). I don't really understand why you have such a hard time imagining a situation where something like that Vertex class would feel like a very convenient and good design choice. Not all programs that handle, for example, triangle meshes are doing so to merely feed the data to OpenGL (or any other API). There may be myriads of reasons why a program may want to handle triangle meshes in some manner, and some of these applications may be something that benefit from extreme speed (because they may need to do a lot of heavy operations to gigantic triangle meshes). It's very natural to think that since each vertex of the mesh has a lot of data attached to it (such as its position, uv-coordinates, etc), to group all this data into one class (or struct) for easy handling. After all, if you need to, for example, copy a vertex, or remove a vertex, or do many other types of operations to single vertex objects, it's most convenient when the vertex is one single object. Many operations become less convenient and more laborious, requiring writing more code, when the data of the vertices has been split into separate arrays. But the thing is, if you want maximal efficiency, sometimes you need to do some compromises regarding convenience and nice abstractions.
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
"Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-07-27 14:59 -0500
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2021-07-27 13:48 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2021-07-27 22:05 +0100
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-07-27 14:23 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2021-08-05 19:49 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2021-08-19 20:08 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2021-08-19 18:20 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-08-20 06:13 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2021-08-20 06:17 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2021-08-20 00:03 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-08-20 11:03 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" mickspud@downthefarm.com - 2021-08-20 15:19 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2021-08-20 14:26 +0200
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-08-29 23:40 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-27 21:01 -0300
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-07-28 08:16 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2021-07-28 16:22 +0200
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2021-07-28 07:53 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2021-07-28 21:23 +0200
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2021-07-28 14:16 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-07-29 06:53 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-07-29 09:31 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" MrSpud_71i5@slwgrcbmd1l7yi1.org - 2021-07-30 11:21 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-08-01 08:28 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-08-01 05:49 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-08-02 10:23 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" MrSpud_rLY23@_h_.co.uk - 2021-08-02 15:05 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-08-03 04:57 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-08-03 12:16 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-08-03 06:01 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-08-08 13:03 +1200
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-08-07 22:43 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2021-08-01 21:40 +0100
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> - 2021-07-29 09:53 +0100
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-07-30 13:51 +0200
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-07-30 13:40 +0200
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-07-28 04:05 +0200
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" MrSpud_oyam9ltRb0@khlkg.info - 2021-07-28 09:30 +0000
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-07-28 08:19 +0200
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-08-03 13:10 -0700
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-08-03 18:37 -0500
Re: "Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com> - 2021-08-05 18:17 -0300
Re:"Nearly a quarter-century later, why is C++ still so popular?" Blue Hat <blue_hat@hackershaven.com.jm> - 2021-08-08 13:33 -0500
csiph-web