----- Original Message ----- > On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Brian Paul <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 01/06/2014 05:22 PM, Erik Faye-Lund wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Brian Paul <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Evidently, there's some other definition of "min" and "max" that > >>> causes MSVC to choke on these function names. Renaming to min2() > >>> and max2() fixes things. > >> > >> > >> Wouldn't it be easier to just make sure NOMINMAX is defined before > >> including any system-headers? > > > > > > I wasn't aware of that option. I think I'll just leave things as-is for > > now > > to avoid churn. > > > > Why was this pushed out prematurely, then? Reviewing within two hours > seems to be reasonable, no?
The MSVC build was broken: ie, no builds, no tests, nothing. Everything was blocked until this is fixed, so if another unrelated change is pushed in and happens to introduce a regression we don't see it until the build is fixed. Build failures are also a pain when one day one needs to bisect across this change. This is why _any_ fix is better than no fix in such circunstances. I even think that review is optional for trivial changes. The most important is get builds going again. Jose _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
