On 10/08/2011 01:27 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 01:10:13PM +0200, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
On 10/08/2011 12:26 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 10:58:13AM +0200, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
Oh, and one more style comment below:
On 08/07/2011 10:39 PM, Marek Olšák wrote:
+enum ttm_buffer_usage {
+ TTM_USAGE_READ = 1,
+ TTM_USAGE_WRITE = 2,
+ TTM_USAGE_READWRITE = TTM_USAGE_READ | TTM_USAGE_WRITE
+};
Please don't use enums for bit operations.
Now I'm curious. Why not?
Because it's inconsistent with how flags are defined in the rest of the
TTM module.
Ah OK. I was wondering if there's some subtle technical issue involved.
I've recently gotten to the habit of using enums for pretty much all
constants. Just easier on the eye IMHO, and avoids cpp output from
looking like number soup.
Yes, there are a number of advantages, including symbolic debugger output.
If we had flag enums that enumerated 1, 2, 4, 8 etc. I'd feel motivated
to move
all TTM definitions over.
/Thomas
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
