Revision history [back]

yes, there are a lot of arguments against your approach:

• premature optimization (look it up)
• you should not mess with cv::Mat's internal structure at all
• your code is slower that Mat ::at()
• this is not C, and your macro is messy

in general:

• avoid per-pixel operations at all cost, in 90% cases, there's a high-level, optimized function for this already in opencv

• get a row ptr(), and access the desired type directly, like explained here

• don't try to be smart. don't try to be smarter than the devs.