On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Sean Burke wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Jason Ekstrand
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Mar 7, 2015 10:57 AM, "Sean Burke" wrote:
>> >
>> > The memory layout of compatible internal formats may differ in bytes per
>> > block, so TexFormat is not a reliable me
On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Jason Ekstrand
wrote:
>
> On Mar 7, 2015 10:57 AM, "Sean Burke" wrote:
> >
> > The memory layout of compatible internal formats may differ in bytes per
> > block, so TexFormat is not a reliable measure of compatibility.
> Additionally,
> > the current check allow
On Mar 7, 2015 10:57 AM, "Sean Burke" wrote:
>
> The memory layout of compatible internal formats may differ in bytes per
> block, so TexFormat is not a reliable measure of compatibility.
Additionally,
> the current check allows compressed textures of the same block size to be
used,
> which is in
The memory layout of compatible internal formats may differ in bytes per
block, so TexFormat is not a reliable measure of compatibility. Additionally,
the current check allows compressed textures of the same block size to be used,
which is in violation of the spec.
v2: Use a switch instead of arra
