Re: [AD] al_copy_transform

[Peter Wang <novalazy@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2010-07-17, Thomas Fjellstrom <tfjellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On July 16, 2010, Trent Gamblin wrote:
> > On Fri, July 16, 2010 5:56 pm, Peter Wang said:
> > > Should we swap the order of the arguments to al_copy_transform,
> > > so the destination comes first?  I almost got bit by this yesterday
> > > (saved by const)
> > 
> > For me, I'll always look it up in the docs, because that's something
> > I probably won't remember... but C convention is usually destination
> > first, so I'd say yes.
> 
> I thought we switched the al_transform_transoform arg order to match 
> al_copy_transform?

r13425 says:

    Switched the order of parameters in al_transform_transform to make
    it match the rest of the transform functions.

where the change moves the destination to the first argument.

-void al_transform_transform(const ALLEGRO_TRANSFORM *trans, ALLEGRO_TRANSFORM *trans2)
+void al_transform_transform(ALLEGRO_TRANSFORM *trans, const ALLEGRO_TRANSFORM *other)

So al_copy_transform should have been changed as well.

Peter