[Mesa-dev] RFC: Standardize names of OpenGL functions in Mesa.

[Chad Versace]

+1

I hope no one voices complaints. I wish to see this change occur.

On 11/07/2012 12:05 PM, Paul Berry wrote:
> In situations where an OpenGL function has several equivalent names, Mesa
> currently does not follow a consistent standard for which name is used.
> For example, the function glDisablei() (introduced in GL 3.0) is equivalent
> to glDisableIndexedEXT() (introduced in EXT_draw_buffers2).  Mesa manages
> the dispatch table using functions names {SET,GET,CALL}_DisableIndexedEXT,
> but it implements the call in a function called _mesa_DisableIndexed().
> 
> This is only one of literally hundreds of inconsistencies.  In some cases,
> the implementation matches the GET/SET/CALL functions, in some cases it
> doesn't.  In some cases, the name used in Mesa matches the name defined in
> a GL spec; in others it matches the name defined in an extension.  Finally,
> some Mesa implementation functions begin with the prefix "loopback_",
> "_es_", or "_check_" instead of the more usual "_mesa_".
> 
> These inconsistencies can lead to a lot of frustration when grepping
> through source code, or setting breakpoints in the debugger, because a fair
> amount of sleuthing is sometimes necessary to figure out which function
> name to use.  Also, it led me to have to do extra work when preparing my
> patch series "dispatch: code generate _mesa_create_exec_table".  While
> reviewing that patch series, several folks asked if we could simply rename
> the mesa functions and adjust the XML to make everything consistent.
> 
> With a bit of script-fu, I've made a patch that does all the renaming.  I'm
> interested in getting some code review, as well as some impressions of
> whether this change sounds like a good idea.
> 
> Because so many functions got renamed, the patch is way too big to send to
> the mailing list, so I've located it at git://
> github.com/stereotype441/mesa.git, in the branch
> "standardize-function-names".  There are three small patches on top of it,
> to fix minor compiler warnings introduced by the change, and to get rid of
> the code generation logic that used to be necessary to account for the name
> anomalies.
> 
> Thanks in advance for your consideration :)