Hi,

On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 7:32 AM, Robert Bragg <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'd personally be fairly happy with the flush type approach; but I'd
> take the opportunity to add something like cogl_flush_gl_state() which I
> think would tie into ideas we've discussed in the past about improving
> the ability to break out of Cogl into raw GL.

Internally to COGL, maybe you want to keep a _cogl_flush_matrices()
distinct from flushing 'everything' but make the public API just a
'flush everything'? Something like that makes sense to me.

Havoc
-- 
To unsubscribe send a mail to [email protected]

Reply via email to