On Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 07:57:49AM -0600, Thomas Roell wrote:
> 1. The defines (types/tokens) should be per extensions, and guarded
> properly, so that they are only defined, if the extension has not
> been defined yet in gl.h. I know that in theory there should never
> be conflicts, but it would be just nicer to deal with.
Some extensions share enumerants; currently the generator script
does one pass over all the enums defined in the spec file and comments
out redefinitions. Are there still compilers around that complain about
benign redefinitions?
> 2. Explicite function prototypes should go away.
If we were using this solely for Linux, I would agree. However,
it's intended to be used on other platforms not supporting the query
mechanism.
Jon Leech
SGI
- [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: 1 YES, 2 A Jon Leech
- Re: [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: 1 YES, 2 A Thomas Roell
- RE: [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: 1 YES, 2 A Michael Gold
- RE: [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: 1 YES, 2 A Stephen J Baker
- Re: [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: 1 YES, 2 A Leath Muller
- Re: [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: 1 YES, 2 A Jon Leech
- Re: [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: 1 YES, 2 ... Thomas Roell
- Re: [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: 1 YES... Brian Paul
- Re: [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: 1 YES... Jon Leech
- Re: [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: ... Thomas Roell
- Re: [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: 1 YES... Stephen J Baker
- Re: [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: 1 YES, 2 ... Brett Johnson
- RE: [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: 1 YES, 2 A Michael Gold
- Re: [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: 1 YES, 2 A Richard Hecker
- RE: [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: 1 YES, 2 A Stephen J Baker
- RE: [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: 1 YES, 2 A Michael Gold
- RE: [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: 1 YES, 2 A Michael Gold
- Re: [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: 1 YES, 2 A Brian Paul
- Re: [oglbase-discuss] Vote results: 1 YES, 2 ... Stephen J Baker
