https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=93594
--- Comment #17 from Roland Scheidegger <sroland at vmware.com> --- (In reply to Nicolai H�hnle from comment #16) > > One annoying aspect of this language is that one can reasonably read it as > non-uniformity only being relevant for non-helper fragments. If a pixel quad > is partial covered by the original primitive, and discard is used in a way > that keeps the covered pixels but discard the helper ones, should > derivatives be defined or not? That's a good question... My interpretation would be that derivatives should be undefined in this case if only because otherwise things get even more complex... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/attachments/20160218/fa18cacd/attachment.html>
