[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

AW: [Public WebGL] ESSL -> HLSL -> cso, do we really need to do this?



Maybe there is a missunderstanding.
 
I was not talking about an ES 2.0 and ES 3.0 version of Angle. I pretty sure it would be possible to build one version that contains all entry points for both versions. I was talking about all the systems out there that don't Support DX 10+ at all or only in compatibility mode.
 
An upgrade to "pure" DX 10+ would leave all people with Windows XP and DX9 level hardware behind. DX11 allows to use DX9 level hardware. But this compatibility mode doesn't support all features that can be reached with the DX9 runtime and has a higher overhead. There is a software engine (WARP) for DX11 but it is too slow for more than simple use cases.
 
So my concern was about maintain a DX9 and DX10+ version of Angle.
 

Von: Florian Bösch [pyalot@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Samstag, 2. Februar 2013 18:09
An: Kornmann, Ralf
Cc: Brandon Jones; public webgl
Betreff: Re: [Public WebGL] ESSL -> HLSL -> cso, do we really need to do this?

On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Kornmann, Ralf <rkornmann@ea.com> wrote:
 I am not sure if going forward with two versions of Angle can be done.
It has to be done anyway. OpenGL ES 3.0 contains many features which are, in combination, only found on about 80% of desktops and on about 0% of mobiles at this time. This will change, but slowly. So unless you want to see WebGL support (any version of webgl) plummet into the cellar, WebGL 1.0 backwards support is an absolute must.