<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - ir_variable has maximum access out of bounds -- but it's not out of bounds" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109532#c27">Comment # 27</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - ir_variable has maximum access out of bounds -- but it's not out of bounds" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109532">bug 109532</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:andrey.simiklit@gmail.com" title="asimiklit <andrey.simiklit@gmail.com>"> asimiklit</a> <pre>(In reply to Ilia Mirkin from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=109532#c24">comment #24</a>) > """ > But according to next comment it should be 0 because of the BlockB[0] was > optimized > and there is the BlockB[1] only: > > /* The ARB_shading_language_420pack spec says: > * > * If the binding identifier is used with a uniform block instanced as > * an array then the first element of the array takes the specified > * block binding and each subsequent element takes the next consecutive > * uniform block binding point. > */ > """ > > I don't think that's enough justification for the "mesa" way of doing it. > Whether a block is eliminated or not is not specified by GLSL spec. Would be > good to get some more experienced opinions on this. [Not mine...] I have asked about it here: <a href="https://github.com/KhronosGroup/OpenGL-API/issues/46">https://github.com/KhronosGroup/OpenGL-API/issues/46</a> Hope that somebody will clarify it)</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>