-
I've been trying to use the functionality to create named pools as described in the Crash course under 'Beam me up, registry". auto poolATest = reg.storage<MyCompA>("Test"_hs);
auto poolBTest = reg.storage<MyCompB>("Test"_hs); Note that the passed identifier "Test" is the same for both calls, however the component type in the <>brackets is different.
was, that the identifier that I am passing will be 'combined' with the identifier generated from the component type. Trying this does however trigger an 'Unexpected type' assert in 'assure' since the second call to 'storage' seems to access the same pool as the first call. Is this assumption correct? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 1 comment 2 replies
-
☝️ They aren't combined with the type name. Identifiers are used as-is. So, yeah, in your example they cause a conflict and thus and assert. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
☝️
They aren't combined with the type name. Identifiers are used as-is. So, yeah, in your example they cause a conflict and thus and assert.
Consider that combining would mean concatenating and therefore probably allocating. It's not something I'd want in any case.