On 28 November 2017 at 14:31, Nicolai Hähnle wrote:
> On 28.11.2017 14:58, Andres Gomez wrote:
>>
>> Nicolai, this looks like a good candidate to nominate for inclusion in
>> all the stable queues.
>>
>> What do you think?
>
>
> It's a rare enough use case, but the change
On 28.11.2017 14:58, Andres Gomez wrote:
Nicolai, this looks like a good candidate to nominate for inclusion in
all the stable queues.
What do you think?
It's a rare enough use case, but the change is small and there seem to
have been no regressions, so sure, go ahead for both of them.
Nicolai, this looks like a good candidate to nominate for inclusion in
all the stable queues.
What do you think?
On Tue, 2017-10-10 at 14:09 +0200, Nicolai Hähnle wrote:
> From: Nicolai Hähnle
>
> The intended rule has been clarified in GLSL 4.60, Section 8.13.2
>
I meant to review this a while ago. Sorry for the delay.
Reviewed-by: Timothy Arceri
On 10/10/17 23:09, Nicolai Hähnle wrote:
From: Nicolai Hähnle
The intended rule has been clarified in GLSL 4.60, Section 8.13.2
(Interpolation Functions):
Ping?
On 10.10.2017 14:09, Nicolai Hähnle wrote:
From: Nicolai Hähnle
The intended rule has been clarified in GLSL 4.60, Section 8.13.2
(Interpolation Functions):
"For all of the interpolation functions, interpolant must be an l-value
from an in declaration;
From: Nicolai Hähnle
The intended rule has been clarified in GLSL 4.60, Section 8.13.2
(Interpolation Functions):
"For all of the interpolation functions, interpolant must be an l-value
from an in declaration; this can include a variable, a block or
structure