| Re: [AD] SF.net SVN: alleg:[13931] allegro/branches/5.1 |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
On Sat, 2010-11-27 at 07:44 +1100, Peter Wang wrote:
> On 2010-11-26, Evert Glebbeek <eglebbk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 26 Nov 2010, at 14:34 , Evert Glebbeek wrote:
> > > Hmm... I must have missed it.
> >
> > Ot maybe not, in which case I may have thought "do what you have to do".
> > What prompted me to ask the question now is that we're post 5.0 RC1 and probably shouldn't remove documented symbols without some discussion at least.
> > Again though, I'll wait and see what everyone else thinks.
>
> I agree we should add back ALLEGRO_VIDEO_BITMAP as a non-zero constant.
>
> We will probably need to make al_set_new_bitmap_flags() imply
> ALLEGRO_VIDEO_BITMAP whenever ALLEGRO_MEMORY_BITMAP is not present.
>
And ignore ALLEGRO_MEMORY_BITMAP when both are present. Didn't seem to
add much so I found it better to remove. If we ever get another type of
bitmap besides memory and video we'd have to add the flag anyway though.
--
Elias Pschernig <elias.pschernig@xxxxxxxxxx>