[PATCH 1/4] wined3d: Vertex fog uses the absolute eye position z (v3).

[Stefan Dösinger]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Am 2014-11-27 14:14, schrieb Joachim Priesner:
> Am Donnerstag, 27. November 2014 schrieb Stefan Dösinger:
>> This is written from scratch, but inspired by the patch from 
>> Joachim Priesner. The included test tests the absolute minimum 
>> necessary to show that the abs() needs to be placed in the fixed
>>  function vertex pipeline replacement shader. It ignores vertex
>> and pixel shader behavior.
> 
> Does this mean I can finally stop worrying about my version of the
>  bug fix and concentrate on getting my other two pending patch sets
>  in?

Yes. Version 3 of my patches made it in, so your game should work now.
The part from your test that tested the vertex shader behavior is still
on my todo list, but since we don't know any application that has a
problem with the current behavior it is fairly low priority.

I must admit that the way we handled this was not our finest hour. It is
quite clear that we have a big problem with handling new or sporadic
contributors.

> ws2_32: WS_get_local_ips: Fix ordering of IP addresses by metric
> if two addresses have the same metric (try 2)
> 
> which seems pretty straightforward and fixes a real bug, and also
> on
I agree that it is straightforward. I only see a minor issue: I think
you can drop the if (!left || !right) check - the qsort man page
suggests this is not necessary.

I guess writing tests for this is impossible because the input comes
directly from the host system's network setup which can only be
modified with root permissions.

The other problem ws2_32 has is that there's apparently no one except
Alexandre who claims to know it well.

> [PATCH 3/3] comctl32: Implement the TaskDialog function (try 2) 
> [PATCH 2/3] comctl32: Basic implementation of TaskDialogIndirect 
> (try 2) [PATCH 1/3] comctl32: Move TaskDialogIndirect function to
> separate file (try 2)
I have never touched comctl32, so I'm not really qualified here. The
overall feeling is that the code looks like is is copypasted together
from various places. (The style inconsistencies trigger that
suspicion). Combined with the lack of tests it raises the question of
how solid this implementation is in the long run.

Also the defines like TD_WARNING_ICON look like they're copypasted
from Microsoft's header.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=+m+F
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----