Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Working Group Info

  1. #1

    Working Group Info

    I understand the working group has started. Is there any transparency on the process for non-members?

  2. #2
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1

    Re: Working Group Info

    I'm also very interested in following the progress of the working group and would appreciate any links to public-facing resources/information.

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1

    Re: Working Group Info

    I am also very interested on any informacion about WebGL as well as for the upcoming specs.

  4. #4
    Member Coolcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    NRW, Germany
    Posts
    75

    Re: Working Group Info

    I am also very interested on any informacion about WebGL as well as for the upcoming specs.
    same here...

    It's really hard to guess for some OpenGL functions how they are ported to JavaScript.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    90

    Re: Working Group Info

    I've found that a combination of the OpenGL ES book (http://www.amazon.com/OpenGL-ES-2-0-...dp/0321502795/) and this Mozilla page <http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-centr...ntextWebGL.idl> has helped a lot when trying to figure out the API.

    But yes, a formal spec would be really helpful! I've read elsewhere that a draft was planned for release in October, with a final version expected next year, but I don't know if that's (still) correct.


    Cheers,

    Giles

  6. #6
    Member Coolcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    NRW, Germany
    Posts
    75

    Re: Working Group Info

    has helped a lot when trying to figure out the API.
    yeah, but, for example, what about functions returning an CanvasArray, e.g. getFloatv? How to access these arrays?

    Also: Is there a more efficient way to create CanvasArray's as first creating an new JavaScript array, which is actually an hash table?

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    90

    Re: Working Group Info

    Re: getFloatv -- fair point. I don't think either that or getFloat is implemented yet in Minefield anyway.

    Re: creating CanvasArrays -- if there is, I've not see it! OTOH if you structure your code for efficiency -- as you mentioned on the other thread -- and you only create them once when the page is loaded, then it's not such a big deal, no? (Or are JS arrays really that inefficient?)

  8. #8
    Member Coolcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    NRW, Germany
    Posts
    75

    Re: Working Group Info

    then it's not such a big deal, no?
    That does depend on the mesh size, and also not all data is static.
    Think about an particle system. A fully GPU-based particle system might be possible, but without access to geometry shaders, transform feedback and TextureBufferObjects (TBO) this might be hard. There are more examples for dynamic data, e.g. text rendering.

    Or are JS arrays really that inefficient?
    I'm not sure how arrays are implemented in Firefox or Chrome, but associative arrays are allowed in JavaScript. I know that InternetExplorer does convert a index, say 42, first into an string "42" and computes then a hash value. The first few bits of the hash value are used as index in the internal array. However, IE 8 introduced a internal heuristic, which chooses between true array and hash map.

    However, the biggest problem is to get the data into the array first. Parsing from a string might be really slow, but there is no other choice since binary formats are not possible in JavaScript. I assume the fastest way is currently to provide the mesh as JavaScript-Array and let the browser parse it using its native routines. The function eval() might be helpful here.

    I think I will do some performance tests over the weekend.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    90

    Re: Working Group Info

    not all data is static.
    D'oh! Of course, excellent point.

    I think I will do some performance tests over the weekend.
    I'd love to see the results!

    (Aside: associative arrays don't have to be slow -- Python uses them (it calls them dictionaries) for everything, including object method lookups, so they've optimised them to a quite amazing degree. Obviously it will never be as fast as a C array, but perhaps it can be fast enough that the effect of putting the new vertex positions into the array is negligible compared to the time it takes to calculate the new positions in the first place. Of course, more efficient is still better.)

  10. #10
    Member Coolcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    NRW, Germany
    Posts
    75

    Re: Working Group Info

    Quote Originally Posted by giles
    I think I will do some performance tests over the weekend.
    I'd love to see the results!
    I put this into an new thread.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-18-2011, 08:13 AM
  2. Please activate OpenGL SC working group !
    By oceancru in forum OpenGL SC for Safety Critical Markets
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-05-2011, 08:48 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •