[vtk-developers] vtkVector class -- proposed rewrite

[Marcus D. Hanwell]

On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 11:29 AM, David Gobbi <david.gobbi at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 8:13 AM, David Lonie <loniedavid at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 3:22 PM, David Gobbi <david.gobbi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 12:17 PM, David Lonie <loniedavid at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Would using a typedef be possible for the wrappers? e.g. "typedef
>>>> vtkVector<float, 3> vtkVector3f"? That would eliminate most of the
>>>> complexity in this patch.
>>>
>>> Right now, no, it won't work, but it would be easy to make it work,
>>> easier than handling the macro expansion
>>
>> Could this be added soon? I hope to submit the vtkChemistry patches to
>> gerrit soon, and this is a prerequisite. I understand if it will be a
>> while before this is added, I just want to know if I need to start
>> thinking about other approaches to the vector class in the meantime.
>
> Finalize your design for vtkVector first, and then I'll see what I can
> do to get it wrapped.  Both the macro approach and the typedef
> approach are potentially wrappable.  I cannot give a specific timeline
> for either of them.  Like most of my voluntary contributions to VTK,
> unless there is a specific incentive, it will happen when I feel like
> doing it.
>
If there is no preferred approach from a wrapping point of view then I
would suggest we pursue the typedef appraoch as I think that will give
us the most maintainable code in the long run.

Marcus