Jose Fonseca <jfons...@vmware.com> writes: > On 15/06/16 18:13, Emil Velikov wrote: >> On 15 June 2016 at 15:58, Brian Paul <bri...@vmware.com> wrote: >>> Why is this change needed? Does some compiler balk at 1.f? >>> >> Since I'm the one 'to blame' for these patches I'll answer - consistency. >> These are the only remaining cases where the trailing zero was missing :-) >> >> -Emil > > Although I'm not one of them myself, some people prefer the short ".f" > instead of ".0f". So, unless we all plant to make a point out of > avoiding ".f" when writing new code, and call it out on patch reviews, > this consistency will be short lived. > > That is, I think that attempts to standardize minor cosmetic issues is a > distraction.
It's hard to express just how much I agree with this statement. Nitpicking minor cosmetic variations (not even problems) drags a project down.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
