On Fri, 2013-12-06 at 08:54 -0800, Ian Romanick wrote: > On 12/05/2013 02:08 PM, Timothy Arceri wrote: > > Reviewed-by: Timothy Arceri <[email protected]> > > > > Only small issue is the "too small" commit message could do with some > > rewording. > > Yeah... the wording for both was fairly rubbish. I started writing it > one way, but, when I decided to copy-and-paste, partially changed the > wording. I've changed this to: > > glsl-1.20: Test sizing an array by initialization after the array has > been accessed > > The "big-enough" test verifies that the compiler accepts an initializer > used to size an array after an access (to the previously implicitly > sized array) has been seen when the access would have been in-bounds in > the sized array. > > The "too-small" test verifies that the compiler rejects an initializer > used to size an array after an access (to the previously implicitly > sized array) has been seen when the access would have been out-of-bounds > in the sized array.
This is much easier to read thanks. _______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
