[Pixman] [RFC 1/2] Remove seemingly unneeded comparison(s)

Pekka Paalanen ppaalanen at gmail.com
Wed Apr 27 09:03:39 UTC 2016

On Wed, 27 Apr 2016 09:56:44 +0100
Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 26 April 2016 at 19:12, Bill Spitzak <spitzak at gmail.com> wrote:
> > The old code is comparing pixman_fixed_48_16_t values to
> > pixman_fixed_16_16_t values, thus it is checking for truncation of overflow
> > values.
> >  
> Indeed it does. I'll grep more before asking silly questions ;-)
> > It would probably be better to clamp these overflowed values, like
> > pixman_transform_point_31_16 is doing to clamp to the pixman_fixed_48_16
> > result. Right now the result is an odd mix of clamping and modulus. A
> > rewrite to go directly to clamped pixman_fixed_16_16 values would be even
> > better.
> >  
> Sounds like a plan. Sadly I doubt I'll get to it any time soon.

Wasn't the point of the boolean return from these functions to tell the
caller to drop what it is doing because it cannot be done properly?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 811 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/pixman/attachments/20160427/527bf2ca/attachment.sig>

More information about the Pixman mailing list