问题
One feature that plays a prominent role in many of the writings on data oriented design is that there are many cases where rather than AoS (array of structs):
struct C_AoS {
int foo;
double bar;
};
std::vector<C_AoS> cs;
...
std::cout << cs[42].foo << std::endl;
it is more efficient to arrange one's data in SoA (struct of arrays):
struct C_SoA {
std::vector<int> foo;
std::vector<double> bar;
};
C_SoA cs;
...
std::cout << cs.foo[42] << std::endl;
Now what I am looking for is a solution which would allow me to switch between AoS and SoA without changing the calling interface, i.e. that I could, with minimal effort and with no extra runtime cost (at least to the point of excessive indirection), call e.g. cs[42].foo;
regardless of which arrangement of data I'm using.
I should note that the example syntax above is the ideal case, which might very well be impossible, but I'd be very interested in close approximations, too. Any takers?
回答1:
I'm going to choose this syntax: cs.foo[42]
to be the single syntax and use typedefs to switch between arrangements:
So, obviously given C_SoA
from your post, the above syntax works and we can have:
typedef C_SoA Arrangement;
Arrangement cs;
In order to use std::vector<C_AoS>
instead we are going to have to introduce something else:
typedef std::vector<C_AoS> AOS;
template<class A, class C, class T>
struct Accessor {
T operator[](size_t index){
return arr[index].*pMember;
}
T (C::*pMember);
A& arr;
Accessor(A& a, T (C::*p)): arr(a), pMember(p){}
};
struct Alt_C_AoS{
Accessor<AOS, C_AoS, int> foo;
Accessor<AOS, C_AoS, double> bar;
AOS aos;
Alt_C_AoS():foo(aos, &C_AoS::foo), bar(aos, &C_AoS::bar){}
};
Now we can have:
//Choose just one arrangement
typedef Alt_C_AoS Arrangement;
//typedef C_SoA Arrangement;
Arrangement cs;
...
std::cout << cs.foo[42] << std::endl;
Essentially this converts container dot member index
into container index dot member
.
来源:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/29135201/switching-back-and-forth-between-array-of-structures-aos-and-structure-of-arra