I'm really ambivalent about these patches. 1. I'm not a huge fan of the name "have_version"...it sounds like it would return whether a driver supports a given version, not whether the current context's version is a certain value.
2. Personally I think ctx->Version <= XY is clearer than !_mesa_have_version(ctx, X, Y + 1). With the two-digit notation, you can just do whatever comparison you like, rather than having to negate >= and possibly increment the minor version being compared. 3. _mesa_have_version(ctx, 3, 1) is longer than ctx->Version >= 31 3. I really don't see the major * 10 + minor notation needing to be changed in the future. Even if Khronos did offer (say) a GL 4.3.1 release, the likelihood of it making incompatible changes over 4.3 that require special checks is infinitesimal. It would just be clarifications... Normally, I'm all for encapsulation, but I guess I just don't see much point. That said, I won't object too strongly if people prefer this approach. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
