On Wednesday 23 July 2008 10:29:37 am Victor wrote:
- initial patch used "mask size" + "mask offset", but was rewritten to use
mask value when Stefan Dösinger requested that. I don't want to rewrite it back to use mask size + mask offset.
- mask size and offset can be extracted from mask value.
- using mask instead of "mask size" + "mask offset" requires less function
arguments and smaller format table, although, yes there is a higher chance of producing errors.
But extracting the mask offset and size from the actual mask takes a bit of time, and as it is, the table can't currently set a proper mask for anything over 32 bits (including the 16-bit-per-component unsigned integer types).