On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 2:20 PM, Stefan Dösinger wrote:
> Am 19.08.2011 um 14:04 schrieb Michael Mc Donnell:
>> Ok I see that in dlls/d3d9/tests/buffers.c. So it will fail to lock on
>> Win7 if D3DLOCK_DISCARD is specified and the vertex buffer wasn't
>> created with D3DUSAGE_DYNAMIC?
> Yes, unles
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am 19.08.2011 um 14:04 schrieb Michael Mc Donnell:
> Ok I see that in dlls/d3d9/tests/buffers.c. So it will fail to lock on
> Win7 if D3DLOCK_DISCARD is specified and the vertex buffer wasn't
> created with D3DUSAGE_DYNAMIC?
Yes, unless Microsoft chan
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 8:05 PM, Stefan Dösinger wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed one small issue:
> On Saturday 13 August 2011 12:22:03 Michael Mc Donnell wrote:
>> +static HRESULT convert_vertex_buffer(ID3DXMesh *mesh_dst, ID3DXMesh
> *mesh_src)
>> ...
>> + hr = mesh_dst->lpVtbl->LockVertexBuffer(m
Hi,
I noticed one small issue:
On Saturday 13 August 2011 12:22:03 Michael Mc Donnell wrote:
> +static HRESULT convert_vertex_buffer(ID3DXMesh *mesh_dst, ID3DXMesh
*mesh_src)
> ...
> +hr = mesh_dst->lpVtbl->LockVertexBuffer(mesh_dst, D3DLOCK_DISCARD,
(void**)&vb_dst);
On paper, D3DLOCK_DISCA
On 12 August 2011 13:06, Octavian Voicu wrote:
> As far as I know C99 is not allowed. However, you can emulate round by
> doing:
> floorf(val + 0.5f)
It probably doesn't matter here, but note that that isn't the same as
roundf() for values below zero.
2011/8/12 Octavian Voicu :
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Michael Mc Donnell
> wrote:
>>
>> Is it ok to use roundf and rintf? They're both C99 functions.
>
> Hello,
> As far as I know C99 is not allowed. However, you can emulate round by
> doing:
> floorf(val + 0.5f)
> According to [1] floorf
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Octavian Voicu
wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Michael Mc Donnell
> wrote:
>>
>> Is it ok to use roundf and rintf? They're both C99 functions.
>
> Hello,
> As far as I know C99 is not allowed. However, you can emulate round by
> doing:
> floorf(val + 0.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Michael Mc Donnell
wrote:
> Is it ok to use roundf and rintf? They're both C99 functions.
>
Hello,
As far as I know C99 is not allowed. However, you can emulate round by
doing:
floorf(val + 0.5f)
According to [1] floorf is C99 (only floor is C89), but includin
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:07 PM, Michael Mc Donnell
wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Matteo Bruni
> wrote:
>> 2011/8/11 Michael Mc Donnell :
>>>
>>> + dst_ptr[0] = src->x < 0.0f ? (SHORT)ceilf(src->x * SHRT_MAX +
>>> 0.5f) :(SHORT)floorf(src->x * SHRT_MAX + 0.5f);
>>
>> You
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Matteo Bruni wrote:
> 2011/8/11 Michael Mc Donnell :
>>
>> + dst_ptr[0] = src->x < 0.0f ? (SHORT)ceilf(src->x * SHRT_MAX +
>> 0.5f) :(SHORT)floorf(src->x * SHRT_MAX + 0.5f);
>
> You can use roundf() instead. Actually, notice that maybe what you
> actual
2011/8/11 Michael Mc Donnell :
>
> +dst_ptr[0] = src->x < 0.0f ? (SHORT)ceilf(src->x * SHRT_MAX +
> 0.5f) :(SHORT)floorf(src->x * SHRT_MAX + 0.5f);
You can use roundf() instead. Actually, notice that maybe what you
actually need for correct rounding is rintf() (which essentially
match
2011/8/8 Michael Mc Donnell :
> Hi
>
> I've been working on a test and improvements for CloneMesh as part of
> GSoC 2011. I would be grateful if anyone could comment on my work.
> There are five test cases in the attached patch:
>
> 0. Basic mesh cloning. Declaration has position and normal, and t
Hi
I've been working on a test and improvements for CloneMesh as part of
GSoC 2011. I would be grateful if anyone could comment on my work.
There are five test cases in the attached patch:
0. Basic mesh cloning. Declaration has position and normal, and the
new declaration is the same as the ori
13 matches
Mail list logo
