On 04/16/2012 12:00 PM, nobled wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Paul Berry wrote:
On 16 April 2012 09:44, Ian Romanick wrote:
Here's my new proposal:
* Don't generate a linker error or warning for incomplete programs.
* For draw calls that use incomplete programs, drop the r
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Paul Berry wrote:
> On 16 April 2012 09:44, Ian Romanick wrote:
>>
>> On 04/15/2012 03:25 AM, nobled wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not sure if I'm missing something, but the non-compatibility
>>> OpenGL 3.1 Specification seems pretty straightforward about this:
>>>
>>> page 4
On 04/16/2012 10:01 AM, Paul Berry wrote:
On 16 April 2012 09:44, Ian Romanick mailto:i...@freedesktop.org>> wrote:
On 04/15/2012 03:25 AM, nobled wrote:
I'm not sure if I'm missing something, but the non-compatibility
OpenGL 3.1 Specification seems pretty straightforward ab
On 16 April 2012 09:44, Ian Romanick wrote:
> On 04/15/2012 03:25 AM, nobled wrote:
>
> I'm not sure if I'm missing something, but the non-compatibility
>> OpenGL 3.1 Specification seems pretty straightforward about this:
>>
>> page 42/55 section 2.11 "Vertex Shaders":
>> "If the program object
On 04/15/2012 03:25 AM, nobled wrote:
I'm not sure if I'm missing something, but the non-compatibility
OpenGL 3.1 Specification seems pretty straightforward about this:
page 42/55 section 2.11 "Vertex Shaders":
"If the program object
has no vertex shader, or no program object is currently in us
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Ian Romanick wrote:
> On 04/13/2012 02:35 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 10:41:09 -0700, Kenneth Graunke
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03/27/2012 10:31 AM, Ian Romanick wrote:
On 03/26/2012 01:35 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
>
> I've got a que
On 04/13/2012 02:35 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 10:41:09 -0700, Kenneth Graunke
wrote:
On 03/27/2012 10:31 AM, Ian Romanick wrote:
On 03/26/2012 01:35 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
I've got a question for GLSL 1.40 that could use some interpretation:
Section 1.2.5 in the spec says:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 10:41:09 -0700, Kenneth Graunke
wrote:
> On 03/27/2012 10:31 AM, Ian Romanick wrote:
> > On 03/26/2012 01:35 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
> >> I've got a question for GLSL 1.40 that could use some interpretation:
> >>
> >> Section 1.2.5 in the spec says:
> >> "The following features
On 03/27/2012 10:31 AM, Ian Romanick wrote:
On 03/26/2012 01:35 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
I've got a question for GLSL 1.40 that could use some interpretation:
Section 1.2.5 in the spec says:
"The following features, previously deprecated, are removed:
...
Fixed functionality for a programmable st
On 03/26/2012 01:35 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
I've got a question for GLSL 1.40 that could use some interpretation:
Section 1.2.5 in the spec says:
"The following features, previously deprecated, are removed:
...
Fixed functionality for a programmable stage. Supply shaders for
I've got a question for GLSL 1.40 that could use some interpretation:
Section 1.2.5 in the spec says:
"The following features, previously deprecated, are removed:
...
Fixed functionality for a programmable stage. Supply shaders for
all stages currently being used."
What exactly
11 matches
Mail list logo