Hi,
Can I get any input if my second patch follows "the right approach"? Are
there any astylerc or clang_format to check that my code complies with
code style ?
Thanks
On 04/19/2018 08:41 PM, Marc Jeanmougin wrote:
Hi,
Could anyone help me from here? If there is still a fundamental
problem with the patch, I'll be happy to rework it (or if there is
anything more needed in it)
From what I gathered, pixman is without maintainer, so I'm not sure
either how to proceed or who to contact...
--
Marc
On 04/08/2018 10:46 PM, Marc Jeanmougin wrote:
Hi, I'm back :)
I tried to implement the proposed changes :
* the gradient walker now deals with argb_t (floats) and not uint32_t
* all gradients are WIDE because of the above change
* WIDE formats (using argb_t) can be dithered on write_back call
depending on the "dither" property of the image (set with
pixman_image_set_dither)
* The dithering is still random. I could try to implement other ones if
it's really needed for the patch to be accepted
Thanks for any feedback, please do tell if there are any more changes
needed for the patch to be accepted.
_______________________________________________
Pixman mailing list
Pixman@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pixman
_______________________________________________
Pixman mailing list
Pixman@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pixman
_______________________________________________
Pixman mailing list
Pixman@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pixman
