Arrays of Types - Position in Memory?

Yes, I'm sure you're right, though I haven't done so much of that personally.




I get the same impression, and I don't understand why. It's common for non-C languages to use standard C Structs for compatiblity with external libraries, WinAPI, mixing languages, etc. PureBasic does it, IBasic does it. And it's even more infuriating since BMax is inherently tied into GCC and allows you to include C code in directly into BMax projects. Neither IB or PB is tied in this way, they just do it make it a more versatile language.

I find myself doing the same thing with getters and setters, but there's an overhead to doing things this way. I try to hardcode the calls to the getters and setters and combine all fields of a struct into additional full-struct getters and setters to minimize the overhead when all fields are required, but it's still an incredible waste of time having to code it all for every struct and the end result is - no matter how small the margin - slower than it needs to be.