ogl-sample
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ogl-sample] Question regarding ATI extensions

To: ogl-sample@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ogl-sample] Question regarding ATI extensions
From: Jon Leech <ljp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 01:09:59 -0800
In-reply-to: <20020318163254.GA17413@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from marcelo.magallon@xxxxxxxxxxx on Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 05:32:54PM +0100
References: <20020318163254.GA17413@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: ogl-sample@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-ogl-sample@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.15i
On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 05:32:54PM +0100, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
>  while merging the new spec files I noticed some ATI extensions are
>  commented out, for example:
>
>  # ATI_vertex_array_object enum:
>  #      STATIC_ATI                                      = 0x8760
>  #      DYNAMIC_ATI                                     = 0x8761
>  #      PRESERVE_ATI                                    = 0x8762
>  #      DISCARD_ATI                                     = 0x8763
>  #      OBJECT_BUFFER_SIZE_ATI                          = 0x8764
>  #      OBJECT_BUFFER_USAGE_ATI                         = 0x8765
>  #      ARRAY_OBJECT_BUFFER_ATI                         = 0x8766
>  #      ARRAY_OBJECT_OFFSET_ATI                         = 0x8767
>
>  in fact, I'm wondering why a lot of lines are commented out, for
>  example:

    As mentioned in my previous email - the core 1.3+ and most extension
enums are not currently supported in the SI codebase, so they are
commented out in enum.spec and found in enumext.spec instead. It's not
unreasonable to uncomment them in enum.spec, and they're not all
commented out in a consistent manner - I've just never had any reason to
think about it because enum.spec is not being used for input to any
processing tool that we use, it's just a document.
    Jon Leech
    SGI

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>