I see that K/N converts nested structs themselves ...

# kotlin-native

[Krystian]

I see that K/N converts nested structs themselves into Vals (immutable) for example here:

@kotlinx.cinterop.internal.CStruct public final class Camera2D public constructor(rawPtr: kotlinx.cinterop.NativePtr /* = kotlin.native.internal.NativePtr */) : kotlinx.cinterop.CStructVar {
    @kotlinx.cinterop.internal.CStruct.VarType @kotlin.Deprecated public companion object : kotlinx.cinterop.CStructVar.Type {
    }

    public final val offset: kaylib.Vector2 /* compiled code */

    public final var rotation: kotlin.Float /* compiled code */

    public final val target: kaylib.Vector2 /* compiled code */

    public final var zoom: kotlin.Float /* compiled code */
}

offset and target are both vals and I can't simply modify them once alloc'ed, but I can modify their values which are .x and .y which isn't that much of a problem, but it does cause a little bit of dull modifications of .x and .y one by one (and I'm very sure its for a good reason)
There is no other way to mitigate this at all by somehow being able to mutate offset or target as one, rather than mutating its members?

[Landry Norris]

I’ve found that when cinterop creates a val, that usually means that the struct didn’t use a pointer to, in your case, Vector2. If the struct declaration didn’t use a pointer, the memory layout of the Vector2 gets embedded in the memory layout of your Camera2D, meaning you can’t ‘set’ the location. Even in C, when you set camera2D->target = something else , it’s a shortcut for setting x and y.

[Landry Norris]

You could create an extension Vector2.set(other: Vector2)

[Krystian]

Thanks, I will give that a try and see if that will make it work

[Krystian]

Is there any rational “reason” behind this anyway? Why set it to val if it doesn’t use a pointer?

[Krystian]

Just would love to learn more about K/N and it’s reasons

[Landry Norris]

Kotlin uses reference types.

[Krystian]

Yep using extension made it easier, thank you. This is going to be useful

[Landry Norris]

I’m not 100% sure, but I think there’s a way to set up an operator function so you can use ‘=’ instead of .set

[Krystian]

Hmmm I don’t think there is a way to overload the = operator

[Landry Norris]

Yeah, I don’t see an easy way to create a delegate for the properties, so setValue won’t work.

[Krystian]

Oh well, this works good enough as it is!