On Monday, 28 December 2020 at 20:15:27 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote:
> On Sunday, 27 December 2020 at 14:46:43 UTC, claptrap wrote:
>> So basically if opIndexMember is defined for Foo then...
>>
>> foo[i].x
>>
>> Is rewritten to..
>>
>> foo.opIndexMember!("x")(i);
>
> For an alternative solution see:
> https://github.com/nordlow/phobos-next/blob/master/src/nxt/soa.d
>
> No benchmarks yet, tough, but you're very welcome to add them.

Here's my own implementation which I dug out from an old project of mine from a few years back:

https://gist.github.com/PetarKirov/a074073a12482e761a5e88eec559e5a8

On Tuesday, 29 December 2020 at 22:33:01 UTC, Petar Kirov [ZombineDev] wrote:
> On Monday, 28 December 2020 at 20:15:27 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote:
>> On Sunday, 27 December 2020 at 14:46:43 UTC, claptrap wrote:
>>> So basically if opIndexMember is defined for Foo then...
>>>
>>> foo[i].x
>>>
>>> Is rewritten to..
>>>
>>> foo.opIndexMember!("x")(i);
>>
>> For an alternative solution see:
>> https://github.com/nordlow/phobos-next/blob/master/src/nxt/soa.d
>>
>> No benchmarks yet, tough, but you're very welcome to add them.
>
> Here's my own implementation which I dug out from an old project of mine from a few years back:
>
> https://gist.github.com/PetarKirov/a074073a12482e761a5e88eec559e5a8

Comparing it to your implementation, the main advantage of mine is that it always takes (size_t.sizeof * 2) bytes, regardless of how many members the struct has since it uses a heap allocation for all of the arrays.

On Tuesday, 29 December 2020 at 22:39:48 UTC, Petar Kirov [ZombineDev] wrote:
> Comparing it to your implementation, the main advantage of mine is that it always takes (size_t.sizeof * 2) bytes, regardless of how many members the struct has since it uses a heap allocation for all of the arrays.

Lots of goodies there. Thanks