On, Mon Apr 21, 2008, Rene Dudfield wrote: > Hi, > > yeah, that may be expected by some... however I think we need to think > about backwards compatibility too. Or am I mistaken that your change > will break compatibility? The BLEND_* args are existing since 1.8.0, so I would not expect to break too much ;-). > I volunteer to update the docs, and code if you'd like - once we > decide what to do? > > > For additive particle systems for example(which is the main reason the > code was originally added), you only want to use BLEND_ADD_RGB not > BLEND_ADD_RGBA ... I think. > > Maybe the form... BLEND_ADD, could be considered the same as BLEND_ADD_RGB ? > > Or we could leave BLEND_* as they are now(for backwards > compatibility), and add things like BLEND_ADD_RGB, BLEND_ADD_RGBA ? Sounds reasonable. So we'd #define BLEND_ADD BLEND_ADD_RGB and so on. > But, for backwards compatibility I think we should aim to keep BLEND_* > working as in the 1.8 release... > > > Perhaps we should come up with a list of all the blend modes we could > implement in the future? So we can hopefully get come up with a > sensible list of blend modes. Possibly basing them off the 255 blend > modes. > > > So... I think what could be best is: > - keeping current BLEND_* flags as meaning BLEND_*_RGB, > - adding flags BLEND_*_RGBA, and BLEND_*_RGB. > - changing the blitters to do either RGB, or RGBA > - come up with a list of blender flags we might implement in the future. Sounds good to me. Regards Marcus
Attachment:
pgpdYOKnWC0oU.pgp
Description: PGP signature