Re: d3dx9 [patch 1/2]: Implement D3DXSHEvalConeLight

[Marvin]

Hi,

While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures.
Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be
wrong, but could you please double-check?
Full results can be found at
http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=24560

Your paranoid android.

=== WINEBUILD (build) ===
Patch failed to apply

d3dx9 [patch 1/2]: Implement D3DXSHEvalConeLight

[Nozomi Kodama]

Why is this patch marked as "not applied" by the testbot?
In my computer, with the latest git, it applies fine.

Is there a problem with testbot?

Nozomi

________________________________
 De : Marvin 
À : [e-mail] 
Cc : [e-mail] 
Envoyé le : Jeudi 28 février 2013 18h02
Objet : Re: d3dx9 [patch 1/2]: Implement D3DXSHEvalConeLight

Hi,

While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures.
Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be
wrong, but could you please double-check?
Full results can be found at
http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=24560

Your paranoid android.

=== WINEBUILD (build) ===
Patch failed to apply

d3dx9 [patch 1/2]: Implement D3DXSHEvalConeLight

[Matteo Bruni]

2013/3/1 Nozomi Kodama :
> Why is this patch marked as "not applied" by the testbot?
> In my computer, with the latest git, it applies fine.
>
> Is there a problem with testbot?
>
> Nozomi

Yeah, the old testbot has some issues. FWIW the patches applied just
fine for me.

Now, I know I'm going to be a PITA, but:

+            red_expected = test[l].red_out;
...
+            hr = D3DXSHEvalConeLight(order, &dir, test[l].radius,
1.7f, 2.6f, 3.5f, red_expected, green_expected, blue_expected);
...
+                ok(relative_error(expected, red_expected[j]) < admitted_error,

isn't really better than the previous patch. What I meant is that the
variables storing the output of D3DXSHEvalConeLight should be named in
a way that shows it's the output of the function and what we want to
test, while the variables with the expected values (the values a good
implementation of the function should return and that you use to
assess whether the implementation is working correctly) should be
named accordingly too. So you went from calling everything "out" to
calling everything "expected", which doesn't help much ;)
I'd just remove the red_expected variable and use test[l].red_out
directly. Same for green and blue of course.