And drop it also completely
And thinkin even MORE about that shit, I'll guess I can drop all that things with template variants of functions and so on. I don't think I get much out of it, as the compiler won't really do work as would let him work. Only thing I can really do there is to reduce the number of parameters, that's it... But one thing I'll do is to create a static array class. So having the size fixed and also template functions for copying or mixing other sizes, it should give the most obvious hint to the compiler to unroll all these loops with literal as min/max values. Yes, that's sounds like some good thing to do. Even if this won't work, I can still use the new comfort I got and make my stuff with it. Anyway, arrays seem to be everywhere where I'm working on. Arrays and lists. Of course, there are also trees and so on, but even they are lists in most cases. So I'm on the right way. That's good know. Whereever this path will lead, it may work atleast with a larger feature set for these two basic elements. I mean colors are arrays, vectors are arrays, images are arrays, maps are arrays, objects in game are lists or arrays, everything is in memory is a list or an array. No matter what it is, you can store as a list or an array. Arrays are as great as squares - they make so elemental components that you can't just get rid of them. I like arrays. They are so fast in access.