Re: [PATCH 1/7] d3dx9: Shape functions in own file, add stub and basic tests for D3DXCreateSphere.

[Misha Koshelev]

> On 24 June 2010 05:18, Misha Koshelev <misha680 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dan suggested tests ok during code freeze so blame Dan for my patches ;)
> > Certainly will. wine-devel is an open mailing list, and posting is
> > easy. You'll probably want to check with something like "git shortlog
> > -s -n" if the advice you're getting is actually worth taking. The way
> > I see it, you have more experience with getting patches accepted
> > yourself. More to the point, if you look at
> > http://source.winehq.org/patches/, you'll see 62909 is marked as
> > "Deferred", so resending in a slightly different form isn't going to
> > help much.
>
> As for the patch itself, I'm not convinced there's value in having a
> separate file for "Shape Drawing Functions", these are clearly mesh
> constructors. I thought the original patch was mostly ok in that
> regard, although there are (very) minor issues like using %d for
> unsigned arguments and using imo ugly typedefs like LPDIRECT3DDEVICE9
> over simply "IDirect3DDevice9 *".

Oh and the LPDIRECT3DDEVICE9's are straight from line.c tests. But I will heed
your advice on the %d's

Misha

[PATCH 1/7] d3dx9: Shape functions in own file, add stub and basic tests for D3DXCreateSphere.

[Henri Verbeet]

On 25 June 2010 18:20, Misha Koshelev <misha680(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > regard, although there are (very) minor issues like using %d for
> > unsigned arguments and using imo ugly typedefs like LPDIRECT3DDEVICE9
> > over simply "IDirect3DDevice9 *".
>
> Oh and the LPDIRECT3DDEVICE9's are straight from line.c tests. But I will heed
> your advice on the %d's

I wouldn't object to a patch based on either of those alone, but if
you'll have to resend anyway I might as well point those out.

[PATCH 1/7] d3dx9: Shape functions in own file, add stub and basic tests for D3DXCreateSphere.

[Misha Koshelev]

On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 18:59 +0200, Henri Verbeet wrote:
> On 25 June 2010 18:20, Misha Koshelev <misha680(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > regard, although there are (very) minor issues like using %d for
> > > unsigned arguments and using imo ugly typedefs like LPDIRECT3DDEVICE9
> > > over simply "IDirect3DDevice9 *".
> >
> > Oh and the LPDIRECT3DDEVICE9's are straight from line.c tests. But I will heed
> > your advice on the %d's
>
> I wouldn't object to a patch based on either of those alone, but if
> you'll have to resend anyway I might as well point those out.

Very well then. Let's just leave the deferred patch as is if that's okay
http://source.winehq.org/patches/data/62909

and I'll send out further patches post-code freeze heeding all of your
advice.

Thank you
Misha