[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Public WebGL] gl.sizeInBytes
On Jan 11, 2010, at 2:13 PM, Philip Taylor wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 9:17 PM, Kenneth Russell <email@example.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 12:31 PM, Vladimir Vukicevic <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>>> On 1/11/2010 11:48 AM, Kenneth Russell wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 10:37 AM, Chris Marrin <email@example.com> wrote:
>>>> So then maybe it would be better to replace these with constants
>>>> (ctx.FLOAT_SIZE, ctx.INT_SIZE, ctx.UNSIGNED_SHORT_SIZE), etc.?
>>> I think we should leave sizeInBytes as a function rather than defining
>>> constants. On a hypothetical platform which defined GLfloat as a double, the
>>> WebGL implementation would be responsible for making WebGLFloatArray manage
>>> double-precision rather than single-precision floating point numbers.
> Why does this matter for function vs constant? The WebGL spec could
> define ctx.FLOAT_SIZE etc to return implementation-dependent values,
> the same as sizeInBytes would return. (Maybe that conflicts with
> WebIDL's notion of "constant", but it could be defined as a property
> with a getter that returns the implementation-dependent value, so it's
> the same API syntax and implementation as a constant, as far as I'm
> aware). The only difference for function vs constant seems to be
> syntax ("gl.sizeInBytes(gl.FLOAT)" vs "gl.FLOAT_SIZE"), so it should
> be decided on ease-of-use rather than on implementation issues.
It matters only for consistency. Currently all "constant" values are defined as constants. The definition of a constant is that is has the same value on all platforms. If we have this one value that the spec says is the same value on all platforms, then for consistency, it should be a constant.
You are currently subscribe to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe, send an email to email@example.com with
the following command in the body of your email: