On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Kenneth Graunke <kenn...@whitecape.org> wrote:
> For what it's worth, the OpenGL wiki's Program Introspection page(*),
> under "Interface block member naming" gives an example matching my above
> reply. It says:
>
> uniform BlockName3
> {
> int mem;
> } instanceName3[4];
>
> This definition will create a single member named "BlockName3.min".
> The reason this array of four blocks only counts as having one
> variable is because each of the four blocks uses the same internal
> definition. There is nothing that could be queried from
> BlockName3[1] that could not be queried from BlockName3[0].
>
> (*) https://www.khronos.org/opengl/wiki/Program_Introspection
>
> I think that's a decent explanation of why this is reasonable. Because
> the block entries have per-element entries (Block[0], Block[1], etc.
> you can query whether a block is referenced (i.e. a UBO binding is used).
This might be a stupid question, but why is the field named "mem" in
the code, but the following paragraph says "min"? Are the two not
supposed to be the same?
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
