> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ilia > Mirkin > Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 2:32 PM > To: Lofstedt, Marta > Cc: Marta Lofstedt; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mesa: enable enums for OES_geometry_shader > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Lofstedt, Marta <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > >> Ilia Mirkin > >> Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 2:03 PM > >> To: Lofstedt, Marta > >> Cc: Marta Lofstedt; [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mesa: enable enums for OES_geometry_shader > >> > >> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 7:57 AM, Lofstedt, Marta > >> <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> >> -----Original Message----- > >> >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > >> >> Ilia Mirkin > >> >> Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 1:46 PM > >> >> To: Lofstedt, Marta > >> >> Cc: Marta Lofstedt; [email protected] > >> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mesa: enable enums for > OES_geometry_shader > >> >> > >> >> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 7:41 AM, Lofstedt, Marta > >> >> <[email protected]> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> -----Original Message----- > >> >> >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > >> >> >> Of Ilia Mirkin > >> >> >> Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 1:25 PM > >> >> >> To: Marta Lofstedt > >> >> >> Cc: [email protected]; Lofstedt, Marta > >> >> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mesa: enable enums for > >> OES_geometry_shader > >> >> >> > >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Marta Lofstedt > >> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> > + case EXTRA_EXT_GPU5_GS: > >> >> >> > + api_check = GL_TRUE; > >> >> >> > + api_found = (ctx->Extensions.ARB_gpu_shader5 || > >> >> >> > + _mesa_has_OES_geometry_shader(ctx)); > >> >> >> > + break; > >> >> >> > + case EXTRA_EXT_VIEWPORT_GS: > >> >> >> > + api_check = GL_TRUE; > >> >> >> > + api_found = (ctx->Extensions.ARB_viewport_array || > >> >> >> > + _mesa_has_OES_geometry_shader(ctx)); > >> >> >> > + break; > >> >> >> > >> >> >> You can do these without the special tokens. Or did you mean && > >> here? > >> >> > > >> >> > I am pretty sure that our previous discussions on this topic > >> >> > ended up with > >> >> || to be preferable in these cases, but if you want && I will change. > >> >> > >> >> I actually don't want either. What I'm saying is that if you want > >> >> ||, then you don't have to add these EXTRA_EXT_GPU5_GS things -- > >> >> using the regular mechanism for composing tokens will get you ||. > >> >> You only need to use these special tokens if you want &&. > >> >> > >> > If by the "regular" mechanism mean: > >> > +static const int extra_ARB_viewport_array_or_geometry_shader[] = { > >> > + EXT(ARB_viewport_array), > >> > + EXT(OES_geometry_shader), > >> > + EXTRA_END > >> > +}; > >> > I had that in an earlier patch, where I interpreted your comment as > >> > a > >> rejection. > >> > >> Nope, that's precisely what I mean. The only distinction between the > >> two is the extra check for the ES context. If you want to preserve > >> that, just create a single EXTRA_EXT_ES_GS token which just does > >> > >> api_found = _mesa_has_OES_geometry_shader(ctx) > >> > >> and then you can use that instead of EXT(OES_geometry_shader). The > >> distinction is pretty minor, of course. Exposing one or two enums > >> that you're supposed to error on is probably not the end of the world. > >> Either way is good with me though. > >> > > So, to check if we understand each other. Would it be OK to you, if I > replace: > > EXTRA_EXT_VIEWPORT_GS and EXTRA_EXT_GPU5_GS, both in > value_extra and > > the check_extra(...) switch, > > > > with: EXTRA_EXT_ES_GS in value_extra and according to your suggestion > > above in check_extra(...) > > > > And use EXTRA_EXT_ES_GS instead of EXT(OES_geometry_shader) in: > > extra_ARB_viewport_array_or_geometry_shader[] and similar to: > > extra_ARB_gpu_shader5_and_geometry_shader [] > > Yep, that's precisely my suggestion. I think we understand each other > perfectly. > That's good. I now have this on my github: https://github.com/MartaLo/mesa/tree/oes_geometry_shader_Ilia_enums
> > I hope you're not seeing this as random busy-work -- if you are, please speak > up -- but I think it's best to minimize the number of the custom tokens to the > ones that we *actually* need. Otherwise there's too many ways to do the > same thing, and the getter logic doesn't need any more of those! > > > Cheers, > > -ilia _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
