On Tue, 2015-11-10 at 12:21 +0000, Emil Velikov wrote: > Hi Tim, > > On 8 November 2015 at 22:34, Timothy Arceri <t_arc...@yahoo.com.au> wrote: > > From: Timothy Arceri <timothy.arc...@collabora.com> > > > > This is in preparation for compile-time constant support, > > a later patch will remove validation from the parser. > > Thanks for splitting these up. The approach you opted for seems rather > nasty way imho. Let me elaborate: > > Here you have a re-factoring and "new code". The former should be a > preparatory patch. The "new code" is the moved the validation pass(es) > from the parser. Had a really deep look and I did not see any reason > why one cannot just move X (X < 5 ideally) at a time.
Hmm, your probably right. I'll take a look and give this another try. > As is one has to jump back and forth between patches to double-check > that the hunks added here match the ones in later patch(es). > > If others disagree and like the approach, feel free to ignore my picking. > > Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
