I’d like to write function interfaces that force the user to acknowledge the semantic meaning of built-in constants. For example, I’d like to take
void rotate(float angle); // Rotate the world by an angle in radians.
and change it to
void rotate(Radians angle);
Am I right in believing that the problem with making a Radians class is that it adds code and makes the program slower. Is there a better way to do this?
No, it is possible to make a Radians class that should be optimized by most decent compilers into something that’s no slower than a plain float. You might be interested in boost.units.
In fact, with boost.units you can even set it up so that if someone wants to pass in an angle in degrees it will automatically be converted to radians before being passed to the function. That will possibly slow things down a bit, but it arranges it so you can change what units a function wants without having to go back and edit a whole ton of code.
And, when you finally do want to go and edit all the code, you can temporarily fix it so the conversion doesn’t work and let the compiler find it for you.
Being able to make the compiler enforce constraints like this for you with no runtime penalty and possibly even write all the conversion code for you (at a very tiny runtime penalty) is one of the really neat things about C++ and makes it worth the added complexity over C.
Here is a really simple version of what this class might look like if you hand coded it:
Notice how all of the functions are declared in the class body. This makes them all implicitly have the
inlinekeyword. A good compiler will optimize all of those functions out of existence. Of course, the conversion functions will generate the code to do the conversion, but otherwise it’ll be the same as having a bare float.