On 25 January 2016 at 17:26, Matteo Bruni matteo.mystral@gmail.com wrote:
Many of the issues of this patch come from our current d3dx9 headers. It might be a good idea to fix some of the worst offenders there before adding the d3dx10math.* files. Since formatting-only patches are generally not allowed, you might for example write a patch adding the missing D3DXVECTOR4 constructor and fix up the ID3DXMatrixStack interface at the same time. If someone disagrees with this kind of plan just speak up.
Fixing the d3dx9 headers is fine of course, but I think the biggest issue with this patch is the idea that an 1800 line (give or take) patch called "Add d3dx10math.h/inl" would be any more reasonable than e.g. a 30k line patch called "Implement d3dx10_43". There are reasonable ways to break this up.