[PATCH 3/4] d3drm: Implement IDirect3DRM*_CreateTexture.

[Aaryaman Vasishta]

Not really, I thought that since InitFromImage doesn't exist for version 1,
I wasn't sure if it's a good idea to use it within CreateTexture for
version 1.
Is it fine, though?. I'll use InitFromImage if it's a better approach.
Besides, since they behave the same so far, there's no reason to not use it
anyways.

I agree with thunking version 2's CreateTexture to version 3, I'll resend
the patch for the same, after I get to know your opinion for the above
question.

Cheers,
Aaryaman

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Stefan Dösinger <stefandoesinger at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> > Am 28.04.2016 um 20:17 schrieb Aaryaman Vasishta <
> jem456.vasishta at gmail.com>:
> >
> > @@ -198,13 +198,24 @@ static HRESULT WINAPI
> d3drm1_CreateTexture(IDirect3DRM *iface,
> >     struct d3drm_texture *object;
> >     HRESULT hr;
> >
> > -    FIXME("iface %p, image %p, texture %p partial stub.\n", iface,
> image, texture);
> > +    TRACE("iface %p, image %p, texture %p.\n", iface, image, texture);
> > +
> > +    if (!d3drm_validate_image(image))
> > +        return D3DRMERR_BADVALUE;
> >
> >     if (FAILED(hr = d3drm_texture_create(&object)))
> > +    {
> > +        d3drm_texture_destroy(object);
> >         return hr;
> > +    }
> > +    object->d3drm = iface;
> > +    object->initialized = TRUE;
> > +    object->image = image;
> >
> >     *texture = &object->IDirect3DRMTexture_iface;
> >
> > +    IDirect3DRM_AddRef(iface);
> > +
> >     return D3DRM_OK;
> > }
> >
> Is there anything wrong with calling Texture3::InitFromImage here, or even
> calling IDirect3DRM3::CreateTexture? in D3DRM1::CreateTexture and
> D3DRM2::CreateTexture?
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/attachments/20160429/13e55b27/attachment.html>