> > Anyway, the new clearRT/clearDS functions aren't implemented by all > drivers yet. That should be ok for now since they didn't use to > implement surface_fill neither. > Also, the interface of these is not set in stone yet. In particular, > they can handle a region, which is needed by d3d9, but not d3d10, so > might remove that (also, clearDS (as well as clear) uses double as depth > value, I'm not convinced on that, the only benefit over float seems to > be for z32_unorm depth buffers you can get an exact value that way - but > certainly rgba colors have the same problem, and those are just floats > anyway, but it's a minor detail).
I think these interfaces are OK. I'd rename them to clear_render_target and clear_depth_sencil as we don't generally use camel-case in gallium (TGSI being the exception). I know we needed to use double to get conformance for depth clears - GL does more or less the same (ClearDepth takes a GLclampd). We're probably stuck with it. On whether to include the box or not, I could go either way. It's there now, so unless you are motivated to remove it, it can stay. We're clearly not at the end of the story with clear -- there's still changes to make GL clear happier (masks, scissor) that this doesn't address. If anyone wants to step up with that work, please make a proposal. Keith _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
