https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109532
--- Comment #27 from asimiklit <andrey.simik...@gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Ilia Mirkin from comment #24)
> """
> But according to next comment it should be 0 because of the BlockB[0] was
> optimized
> and there is the BlockB[1] only:
>
> /* The ARB_shading_language_420pack spec says:
> *
> * If the binding identifier is used with a uniform block instanced as
> * an array then the first element of the array takes the specified
> * block binding and each subsequent element takes the next consecutive
> * uniform block binding point.
> */
> """
>
> I don't think that's enough justification for the "mesa" way of doing it.
> Whether a block is eliminated or not is not specified by GLSL spec. Would be
> good to get some more experienced opinions on this. [Not mine...]
I have asked about it here:
https://github.com/KhronosGroup/OpenGL-API/issues/46
Hope that somebody will clarify it)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
