On Wednesday, December 12, 2018 9:17:38 AM PST Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 11:09 AM Jason Ekstrand
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:31 PM Kenneth Graunke
> > wrote:
> >
> >> When we first started using genxml, we decided to represent MOCS as an
> >> actual
On Wednesday, December 12, 2018 9:09:54 AM PST Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:31 PM Kenneth Graunke
> wrote:
>
> > When we first started using genxml, we decided to represent MOCS as an
> > actual structure, and pack values. However, in many places, it was more
> >
On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 11:09 AM Jason Ekstrand
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:31 PM Kenneth Graunke
> wrote:
>
>> When we first started using genxml, we decided to represent MOCS as an
>> actual structure, and pack values. However, in many places, it was more
>> convenient to use a
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:31 PM Kenneth Graunke
wrote:
> When we first started using genxml, we decided to represent MOCS as an
> actual structure, and pack values. However, in many places, it was more
> convenient to use a numeric value rather than treating it as a struct,
> so we added
Reviewed-by: Kristian H. Kristensen
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 9:25 PM Jordan Justen wrote:
>
> Reviewed-by: Jordan Justen
>
> On 2018-12-11 20:23:06, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> > When we first started using genxml, we decided to represent MOCS as an
> > actual structure, and pack values. However,
Reviewed-by: Jordan Justen
On 2018-12-11 20:23:06, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> When we first started using genxml, we decided to represent MOCS as an
> actual structure, and pack values. However, in many places, it was more
> convenient to use a numeric value rather than treating it as a struct,
>
When we first started using genxml, we decided to represent MOCS as an
actual structure, and pack values. However, in many places, it was more
convenient to use a numeric value rather than treating it as a struct,
so we added secondary setters in a bunch of places as well.
We were not entirely
