[PATCH 2/2] d3drm: Partially Implement IDirect3DRM*::LoadTexture(v2).

[Aaryaman Vasishta]

I sent a patch with InitFromFile implemented first. I'll keep it aside and
implement CreateObject first if that's what you want.
After you're okay with the CreateObject patches, you can sign-off on the
LoadTexture patches later on. (after they're somehow integrated with the
CreateObject patches below it).

Cheers,
Aaryaman

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 9:40 PM, Henri Verbeet <hverbeet at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 28 March 2016 at 17:56, Aaryaman Vasishta <jem456.vasishta at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > InitFrom* tests would require CreateObject to work, for which I am
> thinking
> > of implementing as a seperate series of patches. For now I'm thinking of
> > implementing InitFromFile for use by LoadTexture. Will that be okay? I
> could
> > add todo_wine tests for InitFromFile, and once CreateObject is
> implemented,
> > the todo's can be removed.
> >
> It might be ok. I'm not sure it's all that much easier than just
> implementing CreateObject() first though. It would also mean the Wine
> implementation is more or less untested until CreateObject() is
> implemented. The main reason I can think of for implementing
> InitFromFile() first is that it would allow you to send the code
> you've already written a little bit sooner, but I don't think that's a
> very convincing argument.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/attachments/20160328/eacedba6/attachment.html>