> ----- Original Message ----- > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > Ah.. This indeed rings a bell. I don't recall the details but I'm pretty > > > sure > > > I was against dual semantics. And the fact that this problem is again > > > showing its ugly head is the proof of it. > > > > > > We really should have two IF opcodes. And the state tracker should choose > > > which one it wants. > > > > What would be the difference between those two opcodes though? > > > The current IF > > does a bitwise comparison, > > No, according to Marek, the current IF code has two possible behaviors: > - a float comparison for drivers which do not support native integers (i915) > - a bit comparison for drivers which support native integers (others) > > This would be the different for both opcodes. We could call the former FIF or > just IF, and the later UIF.
Yes, I understand what you're arguing for, I don't understand how you want to get there with those two opcodes. Do you want to change the current tgsi exec behavior of IF and introduce a new UIF opcode or do you want to introduce a new FIF opcode that does the float comparisons? Also, which one does the current glsl compiler depend on? _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
