d3dx9 [patch 1/2]: Implement D3DXSHEvalDirectionalLight

Rico Schüller kgbricola at web.de
Mon Sep 17 02:52:53 CDT 2012

On 17.09.2012 00:33, Nozomi Kodama wrote:
> +    { { rout, gout, bout, table, &(table[90]), &(table[180]), 1.01f, 1.02f, 1.03f, },
> +      { rout, bout, gout, table, &(table[90]), &(table[180]), 1.01f, 1.02f, 1.03f, },
> +      { bout, rout, gout, table, &(table[90]), &(table[180]), 1.01f, 1.02f, 1.03f, },

I think it doesn't make much sense to test this, they are doing 
basically all three the same. The name of the variable doesn't matter. 
Besides we test for (rout, rout, rout), these might be good to test: 
(rout, gout, gout), (rout, rout, bout), (rout, gout, rout).

Maybe the naming of the variables is a bit confusing... I used the 
starting name for the name, hence you could also use the expected value 
name or rename the variables to out1, out2, out3 to not make confusion 
with the expected / started color. Though I'm fine with all cases...

> +            }
> +
> +        startindex += order * order;
> +        }

I would indent the startindex...

Some style comments (I have no strong opinion about that, just like to 
mention it):
The brackets "()" in &(table[90]) could be left out. You may also break 
the longer lines into two. Though, I don't know the actual recommended 
line length, but 200 seems a bit long... I only found this 
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2010-September/086996.html .


More information about the wine-devel mailing list