Re: SOC Direct3D - Implement missing D3D9_xx DLLs?

> Can someone confirm this to be already finished (and then remove this item from
>  the wiki?) If it isn't finished yet, what IS missing then?
> Nearly everything is missing. It's just the forwarding and some stubs that have been defined, yet,
> and the D3DXRenderToSurface implementation I submitted recently was coded
> with d3d9 traces, which was something AJ didn't like for reimplementing d3dx9.
> That means someone other needs to take care of that interface, but that's OT for this discussion.
> D3D10_xx DLLs seem to be currently missing (I know we don't have any d3d 10
> implementation yet in wine) and it probably isn't a SOC project, but would
> completely stubbed D3D10_xx DLLs (patches) be accepted if I submit them to the
> patch mailinglist or not?
> I personally don't think it makes very much sense to stub a big library like d3dx10 without
> being able to really implement it (as we'd need d3d10 for this first). You could ask AJ
> for this on #winehackers, but I guess he'll be the same opinion.
> However, you can of course stub the d3dx10 dlls on your local tree and submit them when
> our d3d10 implementation is ready.
> Ok, then the SOC text on the wiki for this item is slightly
> "misleading" / outdated.
> I have updated the GSoC and D3DX wiki sites, so that one
> gets a very quick overview of how "far" we are with implementing it, yet.

Best regards
   Tony