Am 12.08.2012 17:07, schrieb Marek Olšák: > On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 1:42 AM, Roland Scheidegger <srol...@vmware.com> > wrote: >> Am 10.08.2012 00:37, schrieb Marek Olšák: >>> I'd like to have either signed pipe_box or a new struct for that purpose. >> It looks to me like conceptually what you want is more like a coordinate >> pair. I dunno though but negative width/height/depth just aren't very >> intuitive for a box. But maybe I'm the only one caring about that style :-). > > To me, both representations are equivalent because: > x1 + width = x2 (x1 is inclusive, while x2 is exclusive) Yes this is quite obviously true. But by using two coordinate pairs instead of width/height you avoid any confusion over the meaning of negative widths/heights. Though granted a coordinate pair where one coordinate is inclusive the other ecxlusive isn't really nice neither. In any case, it doesn't look like anyone else cares so I guess your suggestion is ok.
Roland > > We could add checks into Galahad to make sure that pipe_box isn't > negative when it shouldn't be. IIRC, Jose said he planned to enable > Galahad by default on debug builds. > > Marek > _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
