Re: RFR: 8320563: Remove D3D9 code paths in favor of D3D9Ex [v3]
On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 07:53:59 GMT, Lukasz Kostyra wrote: >> JFX minimum requirements guarantee 9Ex availability, so old non-Ex paths are >> no longer needed. >> >> In multiple parts (ex. Mesh, Graphics, etc.) where the Device is acquired I >> changed the type to explicitly use `IDirect3DDevice9Ex`. Technically it >> doesn't matter much (`IDirect3DDevice9Ex` inherits `IDirect3DDevice` - it >> was leveraged to transparently use the Ex device in the backend) but now we >> don't have the non-Ex device, so that keeps it a bit more consistent and >> clear IMO. >> >> Verified by running tests on Windows 11, did not notice any regressions. >> Unfortunately I have no way to test this on older systems. > > Lukasz Kostyra has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > Change pd3dEx to pd3d9 LGTM - Marked as reviewed by mstrauss (Committer). PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1445#pullrequestreview-2024655439
Re: RFR: 8320563: Remove D3D9 code paths in favor of D3D9Ex [v3]
On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 07:53:59 GMT, Lukasz Kostyra wrote: >> JFX minimum requirements guarantee 9Ex availability, so old non-Ex paths are >> no longer needed. >> >> In multiple parts (ex. Mesh, Graphics, etc.) where the Device is acquired I >> changed the type to explicitly use `IDirect3DDevice9Ex`. Technically it >> doesn't matter much (`IDirect3DDevice9Ex` inherits `IDirect3DDevice` - it >> was leveraged to transparently use the Ex device in the backend) but now we >> don't have the non-Ex device, so that keeps it a bit more consistent and >> clear IMO. >> >> Verified by running tests on Windows 11, did not notice any regressions. >> Unfortunately I have no way to test this on older systems. > > Lukasz Kostyra has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > Change pd3dEx to pd3d9 Marked as reviewed by nlisker (Reviewer). - PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1445#pullrequestreview-2024451797
Re: RFR: 8320563: Remove D3D9 code paths in favor of D3D9Ex [v3]
> JFX minimum requirements guarantee 9Ex availability, so old non-Ex paths are > no longer needed. > > In multiple parts (ex. Mesh, Graphics, etc.) where the Device is acquired I > changed the type to explicitly use `IDirect3DDevice9Ex`. Technically it > doesn't matter much (`IDirect3DDevice9Ex` inherits `IDirect3DDevice` - it was > leveraged to transparently use the Ex device in the backend) but now we don't > have the non-Ex device, so that keeps it a bit more consistent and clear IMO. > > Verified by running tests on Windows 11, did not notice any regressions. > Unfortunately I have no way to test this on older systems. Lukasz Kostyra has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Change pd3dEx to pd3d9 - Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1445/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1445/files/4a9605fc..d915c19f Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jfx=1445=02 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jfx=1445=01-02 Stats: 4 lines in 2 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 4 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1445.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jfx.git pull/1445/head:pull/1445 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1445
