C++: OpenGL, glm and struct padding

Question

can I safely use the glm::* types (e.g. vec4, mat4) to fill a vertex buffer object ?

std::vector<glm::vec3> vertices;    
glBufferData(GL_ARRAY_BUFFER,  sizeof(glm::vec3) * vertices.size(), &vertices[0], GL_STATIC_DRAW);

I'm not quite sure about that since struct padding (member alignment) could cause some trouble in my opinion, though all compilers I've tested returns the expected sizes.

I'm developing for C++11 Compilers (maybe this make a difference).

score 10 · Accepted Answer · answered Nov 26 '12 at 20:01

Define "safe".

C++ gives implementations wide latitude to pad structures as they see fit. So as far as ISO C++ is concerned, whether this "works" is implementation-dependent behavior.

It will work in general across a number of compilers for desktop platforms. I can't speak for ARM CPUs, but generally, glm::vec3 will be 3 floats in size. However, if you want to make sure, you can always perform a simple static_assert:

static_assert(sizeof(glm::vec3) == sizeof(GLfloat) * 3, "Platform doesn't support this directly.");

score 0 · Answer 2 · answered Nov 26 '12 at 19:45

0

Yes, glm is designed and built specifically for this purpose.

answered Nov 26 '12 at 19:45

anthonyvd

7,329
4
30
51

5

According to the source they are just using structs with 4 floats which isn't safe against struct padding by default. That's why I'm asking this question. – Kr0e Nov 26 '12 at 19:52
1

Why wouldn't it be safe? The library's entire goal is to perfectly agree with OpenGL and GLSL and it's been achieving this since 2005. – anthonyvd Nov 26 '12 at 19:54
@pwny: The OP has explained why and is correct. Sounds like the library has a major flaw in achieving its goal. – Lightness Races in Orbit Nov 26 '12 at 20:02
1

@Kr0e If glm documentation specifies that it's safe then they would need to implement and test it such that it is safe on the implementations they support. There's no reason they couldn't depend on implementation defined behavior to achieve it. – bames53 Nov 26 '12 at 20:05
@bames53: That's not feasible in this case. Alignment could conceivably vary between compiler invocations. You can't just test it once on some platform then put a big green tick next to that platform for this completely unspecified behaviour. – Lightness Races in Orbit Nov 26 '12 at 20:06
@LightnessRacesinOrbit The documentation for glm should cover the supported situations. You absolutely can check a compiler's implementation defined, documented behavior and implement a library depending on that documented behavior. – bames53 Nov 26 '12 at 20:10
@LightnessRacesinOrbit The library officially supports a wide range of platforms and compilers. I doubt a project as serious as this one just "tests it once on some platform" and call it a day like you imply. The library works and will not give you problems if you use it on a supported platform with a supported compiler. For all intents and purposes, it has no issues related to struct padding. I don't see what's "unsafe" here. – anthonyvd Nov 26 '12 at 20:12
2

@pwny: As long as they are not actually instructing the compiler not to pack the struct, this isn't safe no matter how much they think they've tested it. I don't care what it "officially supports". – Lightness Races in Orbit Nov 26 '12 at 20:18
@LightnessRacesinOrbit It's not about just being tested. It's about defined, documented, implementation behavior. It's exactly as correct as using some kind of non-standard mechanism such as a pragma to specify how the struct is laid out. – bames53 Nov 26 '12 at 20:33
@bames53: Oh I'd agree if any mainstream toolchain made guarantees about padding. However, at least GCC certainly does not. That's why [it provides `__attribute__ ((packed))`](http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.2/gcc/Type-Attributes.html). So, if this library is relying on GCC doing that, then the library is mistaken. – Lightness Races in Orbit Nov 26 '12 at 20:49
@LightnessRacesinOrbit It is specified as part of the ABI. GCC, clang, and intel's compiler, for example, all specify their ABIs (and mostly use the Itanium ABI where applicable). I believe that Microsoft does not publicly specify theirs but the basics, such as for simple structs, are pretty well known anyway. – bames53 Nov 26 '12 at 21:20
@bames53: Um, none of the ABIs guarantee packed structs. – Lightness Races in Orbit Nov 27 '12 at 03:13
@LightnessRacesinOrbit They guarantee the exact layout of the struct, byte offset of every member, which bits are used for bit fields, where and how much padding there is, etc... – bames53 Nov 27 '12 at 03:51
@bames53: Okay. Perhaps it's more well-defined _within_ a certain ABI than I thought, but I have some questions if that's the case. I have taken them to http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13582153/does-the-itanium-abi-specify-padding-and-alignment. – Lightness Races in Orbit Nov 27 '12 at 10:27

C++: OpenGL, glm and struct padding

2 Answers2

Linked