2009/8/13 Stefan Dösinger :
> I'd say give wine-patches a try :-) Make sure Alexandre can see how these
> patches will work together with the wpp ones and the actual implementation of
> D3DXAssembleShader
>
If you do, try to split it up a bit more where possible, it's still a
pretty large patch to
Am Wednesday 12 August 2009 21:57:36 schrieb Matteo Bruni:
> > I think it doesn't need two include files, especially since both of them
> > are d3dx9-private anyway. The question is, is it better to just merge
> > them into d3dx9_36_private.h, or have assembler things in a separate
> > file? I tend
2009/8/10 Stefan Dösinger :
> Hi,
> A few comments - mostly things I haven't spotted earlier.
Hi,
I fixed the code, almost completely following your reviews (thank you,
of course).
I'm reporting the differences with your suggestions:
>
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/dlls/d3dx9_36/asmshader.h
>> --- /d
I only looked at the first patch.
2009/8/9 Matteo Bruni :
> +static void asmparser_instr(struct asm_parser *This, DWORD opcode,
...
> +if(srcs) {
> +for(i=0; inr; i++) {
...
> +if(srcs && (srcs->nr != expectednsrcs)) {
...
> +if(srcs) {
> +for(i=0; inr; i++) {
You can s
Hi,
A few comments - mostly things I haven't spotted earlier.
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/dlls/d3dx9_36/asmshader.h
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/dlls/d3dx9_36/asmshader_private.h
I think it doesn't need two include files, especially since both of them are
d3dx9-private anyway. The question is, is it bette
Am Monday 20 July 2009 20:33:44 schrieb Henri Verbeet:
> > While in principle this is right, as many functions are indeed very
> > similar, this won't be pretty practically, even excluding that some
> > instructions really need special treatment.
One more thing comes to my mind here: The assembler
2009/7/20 Matteo Bruni :
> 2009/7/20 Henri Verbeet :
>> Yeah, but you can treat the debug output just like another
>> asmparser_backend. That would mean calling the parser twice when
>> debugging, but that should be ok. You can do something similar on the
>> bytecode writing side.
>
> I'm not so pe
2009/7/20 Henri Verbeet :
> 2009/7/20 Matteo Bruni :
>> That function, in particular, should really be into asmparser.c and
>> not be visible from outside. Then the wine_dbg_sprintf() function
>> comes really handy in this situation, I didn't know it. Note also that
>> this debug_src function is us
2009/7/20 "Luis C. Busquets Pérez" :
> I read several months ago that the itnetion was to create the assembler
> inside the wined3d and then use its functionality inside the diverse d3dx9
> implementations. Has this changed? I think it was Stefan Dösinger sho
> proposed it:
>
> d3dx -> wined3d asse
2009/7/20 Matteo Bruni :
> That function, in particular, should really be into asmparser.c and
> not be visible from outside. Then the wine_dbg_sprintf() function
> comes really handy in this situation, I didn't know it. Note also that
> this debug_src function is used just to print trace info duri
Am Monday 20 July 2009 01:38:35 schrieb Matteo Bruni:
> 2009/7/19 Henri Verbeet :
> > 2009/7/19 Matteo Bruni :
> >> +const char *debug_src(struct shader_reg *reg, BOOL vs) {
> >> + static char buffer[128];
> >> +
> >> + memset(buffer, 0, sizeof(buffer));
>>
> > - "buffer" is static. Using wi
Am Sunday 19 July 2009 23:01:08 schrieb Henri Verbeet:
> > +const char *debug_src(struct shader_reg *reg, BOOL vs) {
> > +static char buffer[128];
> > +
> > +memset(buffer, 0, sizeof(buffer));
>
> This really isn't acceptable:
>
> Note that I think your mentor should have caught basic thing
I read several months ago that the itnetion was to create the assembler
inside the wined3d and then use its functionality inside the diverse
d3dx9 implementations. Has this changed? I think it was Stefan Dösinger
sho proposed it:
d3dx -> wined3d assembler
the wined3d will be re-usable and the
2009/7/19 Henri Verbeet :
> 2009/7/19 Matteo Bruni :
>> Hi to everybody,
>> I'm sending here the main assembler patch for reviews and suggestions.
>> It is bzipped as it is quite a big patch, but I couldn't find a
>> meaningful way to split it.
> It really is much easier to review as separate patch
2009/7/19 Matteo Bruni :
> Hi to everybody,
> I'm sending here the main assembler patch for reviews and suggestions.
> It is bzipped as it is quite a big patch, but I couldn't find a
> meaningful way to split it.
It really is much easier to review as separate patches. The part that
follows is reall
Hi to everybody,
I'm sending here the main assembler patch for reviews and suggestions.
It is bzipped as it is quite a big patch, but I couldn't find a
meaningful way to split it.
A quick mile-high overview: the assembler is divided in a parser and a
bytecode writer. The parser is made by the flex
16 matches
Mail list logo
