You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Texture and queries are two special identifiers which will conserve for their entire life the given/bound target (more here, also this is the same reason why create* require the target as well).
So, here a question rises: shall we promote them to normal classes with a val target?
Pro: less namespace pollution
Vs: we lose inline class benefits
Or we can encode the target into the inline class, which "extends" the base inline class. Such as GlTexture2D : GlTexture
Pro: we keep the inline benefits (to avoid boxing we can have a method to pass the inline class itself as its "super", ie GlTexture2D::asSuper: GlTexture, whenever you have to call a method requiring that)
Vs: we get some additional identifiers
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Texture and queries are two special identifiers which will conserve for their entire life the given/bound target (more here, also this is the same reason why
create*
require the target as well).So, here a question rises: shall we promote them to normal classes with a
val target
?Pro: less namespace pollution
Vs: we lose inline class benefits
Or we can encode the target into the inline class, which "extends" the base inline class. Such as
GlTexture2D : GlTexture
Pro: we keep the inline benefits (to avoid boxing we can have a method to pass the inline class itself as its "super", ie
GlTexture2D::asSuper: GlTexture
, whenever you have to call a method requiring that)Vs: we get some additional identifiers
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: