matteo.mystral at gmail.com
Wed Mar 9 18:37:52 CST 2011
2011/3/10 David Adam <david.adam.cnrs at gmail.com>:
> Thanks for the feedback. What do you mean by "you are forcing a particular
> vertex ordering3"?
I mean that you are testing the vertices of the mesh returned by
D3DXCreateBox in the order generated by native d3dx9, while they could
in general be in any order while still making up a box. That's not a
problem in my opinion because our implementation (when it will be
written :)) could generate the vertices with the same ordering without
> I just test the vertex that D3DXCreateBox sent. I think it is not possible
> to choose the ordering of the vertices for D3DXCreateBox. Did I miss
> 2011/3/9 Matteo Bruni <matteo.mystral at gmail.com>
>> 2011/3/9 David Adam <david.adam.cnrs at gmail.com>:
>> > Hello,
>> > is there any problem with my d3dxcreatebox patch?
>> > Thanks in advance for any feedback.
>> > A+
>> > David
>> Do you refer to http://source.winehq.org/patches/data/71983 ? I just
>> had a cursory look at it: I presume there isn't anything fundamentally
>> broken with your patch (you are forcing a particular vertex ordering,
>> however that shouldn't be a problem for the D3DXCreateBox
>> implementation) but, for sure, code style and formatting should be
>> I know mesh.c is already quite bad in that regard, but that doesn't
>> mean it needs more loose code. For example, in your patch there isn't
>> a consistent usage of whitespace-after-comma, the same for spaces
>> around operators or between the "if" and its condition. To compare
>> expected and actual vertex data you should probably use the
>> compare_vec3() function. Also, are "vertice", "normale" and "indice"
>> Italian words? That doesn't look right. :) (also, the first vertex
>> component is the position, not really "vertex")
More information about the wine-devel