On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Connor Abbott <cwabbo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 1:05 AM, Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net>
> wrote:
> > Some time while refactoring things to make it look nicer before pushing
> to
> > master, I completely broke the function. This fixes it to be correct.
> > Just goes to show you why you souldn't push code that has no users yet...
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jason Ekstrand <jason.ekstr...@intel.com>
> > ---
> > src/glsl/list.h | 4 +---
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/src/glsl/list.h b/src/glsl/list.h
> > index 924c729..4774ccc 100644
> > --- a/src/glsl/list.h
> > +++ b/src/glsl/list.h
> > @@ -534,9 +534,7 @@ exec_list_validate(const struct exec_list *list)
> > * either require C++ or assume the exec_node is embedded in a
> structure
> > * which is not the case for this function.
> > */
> > - for (node = exec_list_get_head_const(list);
> > - !exec_node_is_tail_sentinel(node);
> > - node = exec_node_get_next_const(node)) {
> > + for (node = list->head; node->next != NULL; node = node->next) {
> > assert(node->next->prev == node);
> > assert(node->prev->next == node);
> > }
> > --
> > 2.2.0
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > mesa-dev mailing list
> > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
>
> Just curious before I put a r-b on this, what exactly was broken about it?
>
I should probably have said this in the commit message, but the
list_get_head and get_next return null if it's empty or you're at the end.
Yes, I could have used them and tweaked it differently, but I figured
consistency was probably better.
--Jason
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
