[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 1/3] mesa: Enable enums for OES_viewport_array

[Anuj Phogat]

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Ilia Mirkin <imirkin at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> 2016-09-29 14:42 GMT-04:00 Anuj Phogat <anuj.phogat at gmail.com>:
>> Signed-off-by: Anuj Phogat <anuj.phogat at gmail.com>
>> Cc: Ilia Mirkin <imirkin at alum.mit.edu>
>> ---
>>  src/mesa/main/get.c              | 6 ++++++
>>  src/mesa/main/get_hash_params.py | 8 ++++----
>>  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/src/mesa/main/get.c b/src/mesa/main/get.c
>> index e7ebc7f..64a4b0e 100644
>> --- a/src/mesa/main/get.c
>> +++ b/src/mesa/main/get.c
>> @@ -405,6 +405,12 @@ static const int extra_ARB_viewport_array_or_oes_geometry_shader[] = {
>>     EXTRA_END
>>  };
>>
>> +static const int extra_ARB_viewport_array_or_oes_viewport_array[] = {
>> +   EXT(ARB_viewport_array),
>> +   EXT(OES_viewport_array),
>> +   EXTRA_END
>> +};
>
> I originally had this patch in my series but took it out - why isn't
> it reasonable to just flip on the ARB_viewport_array bit and move on?
> (i.e. decree that in order to enable OES_viewport_array you must also
> enable ARB_viewport_array)
>
I don't see a big reason to prefer one or the other. I noticed we are
doing it this way for few other gles extensions and found it slightly
cleaner. Otherwise I don't have a strong preference.

>   -ilia