There are special rules for browsers on Metro.
Anyway this shader signing I am talking about has nothing to do with the Windows Store. This is just between the HLSL compiler and the runtime. The compiler sign the shader and the runtime checks if the sign is valid. If you know how the sign is calculated you can still do binary shaders but this is not public knowledge. I may be wrong but I am somewhat sure there would be a big problems putting a sign function in Angle that is written based on reveres engineering of the Microsoft HLSL compiler.
Von: Ben Adams [firstname.lastname@example.org]
Gesendet: Samstag, 2. Februar 2013 18:22
An: Brandon Jones
Cc: Florian Bösch; Kornmann, Ralf; public webgl
Betreff: Re: [Public WebGL] ESSL -> HLSL -> cso, do we really need to do this?
I'm not sure a striaght-to-bytecode would stop working.
As I understand it, and I may be wrong, only Windows Metro/Windows Store apps require signed shaders?
Your app must not attempt to change or extend the packaged content through any form of dynamic inclusion of code or data that changes how the application interacts with the Windows Runtime, or behaves with regard to Store policy. It is not permissible, for example, to download a remote script and subsequently execute that script in the local context of your app package.
This requirement applies if you depend on specific 3D graphics hardware features.
If your app includes an ARM or a Neutral package it must support Direct3D feature level 9_1. If your app does not support ARM it must support the minimum feature level chosen on the Store portal.
Because customers can change the graphics hardware in their computers after the app is installed, if you choose a minimum feature level higher than 9_1, your app must detect at launch whether or not the current hardware meets the minimum requirements. If not, the app must display a message to the customer detailing the Direct3D requirements.
In addition to supporting the chosen minimum Direct3D feature level, your app may use higher feature levels when available.
On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Brandon Jones <email@example.com> wrote:
I've never looked into the D3D10+ compile times much, but have they improved over D3D9 at all? Ralf mentioned that a straight-to-bytecode approach would stop working once we upgrade, but if the compiler is better it may be a non-issue.