Am 08.02.2012 14:08, schrieb Kenneth Graunke:
> On 02/05/2012 05:08 PM, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
>> In vbo_exec_DrawRangeElementsBaseVertex, take into account the
>> basevertex.
>> As far as I can tell it is completely ok (though maybe stupid) to have
>> start/end of 100/199, with _MaxElement bein
On 02/05/2012 05:08 PM, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
In vbo_exec_DrawRangeElementsBaseVertex, take into account the basevertex.
As far as I can tell it is completely ok (though maybe stupid) to have
start/end of 100/199, with _MaxElement being 100, if the basevertex
is -100 (since the start/end are
On 02/07/2012 05:18 PM, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
Ping? I don't want to commit that without anyone looking at it.
Sorry, got distracted the last few days. I'm planning to review this soon.
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
htt
Ping? I don't want to commit that without anyone looking at it.
Am 06.02.2012 02:08, schrieb Roland Scheidegger:
> In vbo_exec_DrawRangeElementsBaseVertex, take into account the basevertex.
> As far as I can tell it is completely ok (though maybe stupid) to have
> start/end of 100/199, with _MaxEl
Am 06.02.2012 15:39, schrieb Brian Paul:
> On 02/04/2012 06:14 AM, Jose Fonseca wrote:
>>
>>
>> - Original Message -
>>> On 01/27/2012 06:00 PM, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
in check_index_bounds the comparison needs to be "greater equal"
since
contrary to the name _MaxElement i
- Original Message -
> On 02/04/2012 06:14 AM, Jose Fonseca wrote:
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> >> On 01/27/2012 06:00 PM, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
> >>> in check_index_bounds the comparison needs to be "greater equal"
> >>> since
> >>> contrary to the name _MaxElement is t
On 02/04/2012 06:14 AM, Jose Fonseca wrote:
- Original Message -
On 01/27/2012 06:00 PM, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
in check_index_bounds the comparison needs to be "greater equal"
since
contrary to the name _MaxElement is the count of the array.
In vbo_exec_DrawRangeElementsBaseVertex
In vbo_exec_DrawRangeElementsBaseVertex, take into account the basevertex.
As far as I can tell it is completely ok (though maybe stupid) to have
start/end of 100/199, with _MaxElement being 100, if the basevertex
is -100 (since the start/end are prior to adding basevertex). The opposite
is also tr
Sorry didn't see this response previously, threading didn't seem to work.
Am 04.02.2012 12:40, schrieb Kenneth Graunke:
> On 01/27/2012 06:00 PM, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
>> in check_index_bounds the comparison needs to be "greater equal" since
>> contrary to the name _MaxElement is the count of
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> I'm leaning toward dropping this code that clamps "end" altogether. It's
> awfully dodgy already, and trying to correctly compensate for basevertex is
> pretty much destroying any faith I had left in it working properly.
>
> After all, glDr
- Original Message -
> On 01/27/2012 06:00 PM, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
> > in check_index_bounds the comparison needs to be "greater equal"
> > since
> > contrary to the name _MaxElement is the count of the array.
> > In vbo_exec_DrawRangeElementsBaseVertex, take into account the
> > ba
On 01/27/2012 06:00 PM, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
in check_index_bounds the comparison needs to be "greater equal" since
contrary to the name _MaxElement is the count of the array.
In vbo_exec_DrawRangeElementsBaseVertex, take into account the basevertex.
As far as I can tell it is completely ok
in check_index_bounds the comparison needs to be "greater equal" since
contrary to the name _MaxElement is the count of the array.
In vbo_exec_DrawRangeElementsBaseVertex, take into account the basevertex.
As far as I can tell it is completely ok (though maybe stupid) to have
start/end of 100/199,
13 matches
Mail list logo
