On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 8:06 PM, <spit...@gmail.com> wrote: > From: Bill Spitzak <spit...@gmail.com> > > The other filters do not check for x being in range, so there is > no reason for cubic to do so.
This argument is a bit problematic. We could also argue that this filter was actually implemented correctly/more robust and we should add checks for x to the other filters. I fail to see how this saves us much except from removing a condition in a very specific path. Do you argue that ax will never ever be >=2 ? Oded > --- > pixman/pixman-filter.c | 16 +++++++--------- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/pixman/pixman-filter.c b/pixman/pixman-filter.c > index 7e10108..bf9dce3 100644 > --- a/pixman/pixman-filter.c > +++ b/pixman/pixman-filter.c > @@ -109,18 +109,16 @@ general_cubic (double x, double B, double C) > > if (ax < 1) > { > - return ((12 - 9 * B - 6 * C) * ax * ax * ax + > - (-18 + 12 * B + 6 * C) * ax * ax + (6 - 2 * B)) / 6; > - } > - else if (ax >= 1 && ax < 2) > - { > - return ((-B - 6 * C) * ax * ax * ax + > - (6 * B + 30 * C) * ax * ax + (-12 * B - 48 * C) * > - ax + (8 * B + 24 * C)) / 6; > + return (((12 - 9 * B - 6 * C) * ax + > + (-18 + 12 * B + 6 * C)) * ax * ax + > + (6 - 2 * B)) / 6; > } > else > { > - return 0; > + return ((((-B - 6 * C) * ax + > + (6 * B + 30 * C)) * ax + > + (-12 * B - 48 * C)) * ax + > + (8 * B + 24 * C)) / 6; > } > } > > -- > 1.9.1 > > _______________________________________________ > Pixman mailing list > Pixman@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pixman _______________________________________________ Pixman mailing list Pixman@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pixman