On Fri, 2017-11-03 at 11:52 -0400, Ilia Mirkin wrote: > Reviewed-by: Ilia Mirkin <[email protected]> > > However I might recommend doing like > > const glsl_type *type_without_array = type->without_array(); > if (type_without_array->is_interface()) { > for (... ; i < type_without_array->length; i++) { > field = &type_without_array->fields.structure[i] > > Otherwise it's just redoing the same bit of work over and over again. > Maybe it's smart enough to not do that? (Perhaps without_array() is > marked as a const function?)
At the very least it would make it easier to read, so yeah, I think it is a good idea. Iago > On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 6:56 AM, Iago Toral Quiroga <[email protected] > > wrote: > > This is what we do in the condition too, so it makes sense. > > --- > > src/compiler/glsl/link_varyings.cpp | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/src/compiler/glsl/link_varyings.cpp > > b/src/compiler/glsl/link_varyings.cpp > > index 66a20a2c9b..af938611f4 100644 > > --- a/src/compiler/glsl/link_varyings.cpp > > +++ b/src/compiler/glsl/link_varyings.cpp > > @@ -568,7 +568,7 @@ validate_explicit_variable_location(struct > > gl_context *ctx, > > > > if (type->without_array()->is_interface()) { > > for (unsigned i = 0; i < type->without_array()->length; i++) > > { > > - glsl_struct_field *field = &type->fields.structure[i]; > > + glsl_struct_field *field = &type->without_array()- > > >fields.structure[i]; > > unsigned field_location = field->location - > > (field->patch ? VARYING_SLOT_PATCH0 : > > VARYING_SLOT_VAR0); > > if (!check_location_aliasing(explicit_locations, var, > > -- > > 2.11.0 > > > > _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
