-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.3k
enable easier modification of image samplers in image loaders #22042
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
+60
−0
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
653738f
enable easier modification of image samplers in image loaders
ChristopherBiscardi 9af2011
spelling fix
ChristopherBiscardi 48bac86
add anisotropic helper
ChristopherBiscardi a91d8e4
with_ -> set_
ChristopherBiscardi cac8dd1
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/sampler-fns' into sampler-fns
ChristopherBiscardi 75d1520
backticks for anisotropy_clamp
ChristopherBiscardi 9f60e46
;
ChristopherBiscardi File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think inline is appropriate here. I respect that some other functions in the struct are inline, but they're probably from the olden days when inline was more necessary.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You're probably right. But out of curiosity, the compiler wouldn't inline this since it would always be used across a crate boundary right (without LTO)? So if this were being applied on a huge set of images it might be slower without the inline?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That was true in the past, but since Rust 1.75 (2023/12) smaller functions are automatically tagged as cross-crate inlineable even without LTO.
So my personal preference is to let the compiler decide for these kinds of cases. But I don't think it's a big deal if the function is small and someone wants to add an inline hint to make sure.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd prefer to match the rest of the file for this PR and do an inline removal on all of these in a future PR instead.