On 04/12/2016 04:56 AM, Emil Velikov wrote:
Hi Brian,
I can see that the fix is in, so just a question for posterity.
On 11 April 2016 at 23:39, Brian Paul <[email protected]> wrote:
Instead of using an array indexed by SYSTEM_VALUE_x, just use a
switch statement. This fixes a regression caused by inserting new
SYSTEM_VALUE_ enums but not updating the mapping to TGSI semantics.
Considering the switch has a default statement, is there any benefit
of going that way (we won't get any compiler warnings as we add new
values) over using designated initializer* for the const data ? I'm
leaning (although I've not tried it) that MSVC 2013 should be fine
with the latter. It seems to work fine with structs at the very least.
I guess I was thinking that if someone added a new SYSTEM_VALUE_ but
wasn't working on Gallium, they wouldn't have to worry about this code.
But if someone was also working on gallium, they'd be sure to hit the
assertion upon testing with a suitable piglit test.
Feel free to change the code if you think it can be improved.
-Brian
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
