On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 01:09:25PM -0700, Kenneth Graunke wrote: > These look great! I've gone ahead and pushed them with a few tiny changes: > > 1. I updated a comment in patch 2, which still said the hash_table > mapped using variable names/strings. > 2. I changed the for (exec_node ...) loop in patch 4 to foreach_list, as > it's simpler.
Cool :-) > This /does/ cause a regression in Piglit test glsl-const-folding-01, due > to atan(1.0) being slightly off from the value the test expects. But I > checked that, and it's off in the 5th digit, so it's just a precision > issue. I think the test is being a bit picky, so we may want to change > it. Yeah, I sent a patch to the piglit list for that, if that's the way we want to go. I couldn't find language in the standards about expected precision from builtin functions, but I can't say I searched very hard. > Or, make our built-ins more precise. We can do that in a follow-up > patch sometime. Yeah. You'll also find that acos(1) is not precise enough for picky glsl-const-folding-01, hence the other patch I sent to this list. > Either way, it's definitely a plus that we're using the same code for > the CPU and GPU side. Much better to be consistent. > > Thanks so much for doing this! You're welcome :-) OG. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
