Skip to content
Discussion options

You must be logged in to vote

I think theoretically I could create an alternate entity type and then specialise the storage_type struct for this entity type without the sigh mixin

This is your only option. The storage definition comes from storage_type, which is specialized on the component and entity types.
The registry only understands entity types, while it uses storage_type to lazy initialize storage classes when the time comes (and the component type is known for a moment).
No way you can have two registry types with the same entity and different storage types. I'm sorry.

Replies: 1 comment 1 reply

Comment options

You must be logged in to vote
1 reply
@Avelina9X
Comment options

Answer selected by Avelina9X
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Category
Q&A
Labels
discussion it sounds interesting, let's discuss it
2 participants