kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Edwin van den Oetelaar <oetelaar.automatisering@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 2:27 PM, Lorenzo Marcantonio
<l.marcantonio@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 01:51:17PM +0200, Edwin van den Oetelaar wrote:
>> Why is this stored in a bitmask anyway? Now everything depends on
>> #define INT_BITS
>> would not a <vector> or simple array[] make more sense?
>
> A bit_vector, also. The issue is that there are lots of thing cabled on
> the bitmask logic. At least if you look at my code these 'enum' *should*
> be reasonably substituted with other 'things' (passed by value) without
> too much work.
>
> Part of this is to enable creation of more technical layers (a looong
> standing issue).
>
> In other words there enum are standoff for a future 'more suitable' data
> structure. The patch is already big as it is, do not ask for too much in
> one step XD

I could not ask this from anyone. (the oposite)
If there is a fundamental reason, which would be very strange, for
using bitmasks then let them be.
If there is not a real reason, I will take a look if I can find the
time to refactor them out when I have some days off.
Have a happy day,
Edwin