[Mesa-dev] [RFC 06/21] mesa/extensions: Create _mesa_extension_supported()

[Chad Versace]

On Thu 22 Oct 2015, Emil Velikov wrote:
> On 19 October 2015 at 23:36, Nanley Chery <nanleychery at gmail.com> wrote:
> > From: Nanley Chery <nanley.g.chery at intel.com>
> >
> > Create a function which determines if an extension is supported in the
> > current context.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Nanley Chery <nanley.g.chery at intel.com>
> > ---
> >  src/mesa/main/extensions.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/src/mesa/main/extensions.c b/src/mesa/main/extensions.c
> > index 390e026..7137bc9 100644
> > --- a/src/mesa/main/extensions.c
> > +++ b/src/mesa/main/extensions.c
> > @@ -423,6 +423,23 @@ typedef unsigned short extension_index;
> >
> >
> >  /**
> > + * Given an extension enum, return whether or not the extension is supported
> > + * dependent on the following factors:
> > + * There's driver support and the OpenGL/ES version is at least that
> > + * specified in the extension_table.
> > + */
> > +static inline bool
> > +_mesa_extension_supported(const struct gl_context *ctx, extension_index ei)
> > +{
> > +   const bool *base = (bool *) &ctx->Extensions;
> > +   const struct extension *i = extension_table + ei;
> > +   const uint8_t api_set = 1 << ctx->API;
> > +   return (i->api_set & api_set) &&
> > +          (ctx->Version >= i->version[ctx->API]) &&
> > +          base[i->offset];
> Bikeshed: I realise that you're copying most of these, but wouldn't it
> be better if we use more common/intuitive variable names ?
> 
> ei -> i or idx
> i -> ext

I second Emil's suggestion.

Please insert an empty line between the block of variable declarations
and the return statement.

Also, it improves the readability if you rename the local variable
'api_set' to 'api_bit', because it's not really a set. It's just one
bit.