removing GrDrawEffect

include/gpu/GrEffect.h

Index: include/gpu/GrEffect.h
diff --git a/include/gpu/GrEffect.h b/include/gpu/GrEffect.h
index 102b9d4b961ba89743c8b002426182633ad7b83f..e622ba28ce7ae3f43744fdca7dc8d43fe6dd5c3d 100644
--- a/include/gpu/GrEffect.h
+++ b/include/gpu/GrEffect.h
@@ -130,6 +130,13 @@ public:
         ::operator delete(target, placement);
     }
 
+    /**
+      * Helper for down-casting to a GrEffect subclass
+      */
+    template <typename T> static const T& CastEffect(const GrEffect& effect) {

[bsalomon, 2014/09/15 19:54:25]

How about

template <typename T> const T& cast() const { return static_cast<T>(*this); }

and then do

const MyEffect& me = effect.cast<MyEffect>();

in setData() and other spots?

I find the repeated GrEffect::CastEffect to be verbose.

+        return *static_cast<const T*>(&effect);
+    }
+
 protected:
     /**
      * Subclasses call this from their constructor to register coordinate transformations. The
@@ -155,13 +162,6 @@ protected:
         , fRequiresVertexShader(false) {}
 
     /**
-      * Helper for down-casting to a GrEffect subclass
-      */
-    template <typename T> static const T& CastEffect(const GrEffect& effect) {
-        return *static_cast<const T*>(&effect);
-    }
-
-    /**
      * If the effect subclass will read the destination pixel value then it must call this function
      * from its constructor. Otherwise, when its generated backend-specific effect class attempts
      * to generate code that reads the destination pixel it will fail.