On 17.09.2012 00:33, Nozomi Kodama wrote:
- { { rout, gout, bout, table, &(table[90]), &(table[180]), 1.01f, 1.02f, 1.03f, },
...
{ rout, bout, gout, table, &(table[90]), &(table[180]), 1.01f, 1.02f, 1.03f, },
{ bout, rout, gout, table, &(table[90]), &(table[180]), 1.01f, 1.02f, 1.03f, },
I think it doesn't make much sense to test this, they are doing basically all three the same. The name of the variable doesn't matter. Besides we test for (rout, rout, rout), these might be good to test: (rout, gout, gout), (rout, rout, bout), (rout, gout, rout).
Maybe the naming of the variables is a bit confusing... I used the starting name for the name, hence you could also use the expected value name or rename the variables to out1, out2, out3 to not make confusion with the expected / started color. Though I'm fine with all cases...
}
startindex += order * order;
}
I would indent the startindex...
Some style comments (I have no strong opinion about that, just like to mention it): The brackets "()" in &(table[90]) could be left out. You may also break the longer lines into two. Though, I don't know the actual recommended line length, but 200 seems a bit long... I only found this http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2010-September/086996.html .
Cheers Rico
On 17 September 2012 09:52, Rico Schüller kgbricola@web.de wrote:
longer lines into two. Though, I don't know the actual recommended line length, but 200 seems a bit long... I only found this http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2010-September/086996.html .
Yeah, 100 is safe, but it's not a hard limit. Personally I use 120 in wined3d.