<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" /> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW --- - Gallium: GL_LINE_LOOP broken with more than 512 points" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=81174#c13">Comment # 13</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW --- - Gallium: GL_LINE_LOOP broken with more than 512 points" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=81174">bug 81174</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:sroland@vmware.com" title="Roland Scheidegger <sroland@vmware.com>"> Roland Scheidegger</a> <pre>(In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=81174#c12">comment #12</a>) > (In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=81174#c9">comment #9</a>) > > (In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=81174#c8">comment #8</a>) > > > Line loops aren't so critical, since they are rarely used. But what about > > > triangle strips... every split kills 2 triangles... > > > > That shouldn't happen, the code is supposed to copy over the necessary two > > tris. > > What about primitive winding/facing? If you wrap a triangle strip and start > on an odd triangle, you'll end up with correct front/back faces. If you > start on an even triangle, the facing is inverted, isn't it? This should also be handled correctly I believe. See the comments about "parity issue" in vbo_copy_vertices(). Essentially the code ensures the new buffer always starts on an odd triangle. (Though on a quick look I wouldn't be able to tell if it's all correct but it probably is as otherwise there'd probably have been bug reports about it.)</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>