This QML 2 is sounding like it is more a bother than it is worth.
I thought QPA was the end-all-be-all of platform abstraction? Why can't QPA be
used with scene graph?
________________________________
From: Samuel Rødal <samuel.ro...@digia.com>
To: Jason H <scorp...@yahoo.com>
Cc: "interest@qt-project.org" <interest@qt-project.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 9, 2013 10:58 AM
Subject: Re: [Interest] Crazy Idea of the day: WebGL renderer
On 01/09/2013 04:17 PM, Jason H wrote:
> You bring up a good point. Maybe the output is JS to the web browser.
> And I think that is a more awesome solution - because then your
> deployment platform does not need to support Qt. While I originally
> conceived of this to introduce people to QML I ran into another idea. I
> have a Samsung SmartTV which has a HTML5/Webkit app development
> environment. If Samsung supported WebGL (which they might, I haven't
> checked) we could write apps for Samsung TV but run them off a remote
> server. The code on the server would be QML, and we could target any
> WebGL compliant platform.
>
> I don't think performance is that critical. If it was they wouldn't be
> running it in a browser. ;-)
>
> The problem with NaCL is you have to wait and download the entire
> binary. Meanwhile if you just spit out JS/WebGL commands there is no
> transfer time.
Well, streaming of JS/WebGL still sounds a bit dubious. Do you force the
browser to reevaluate a bunch of JS for each frame? If it's at the QPA level
you either need to make a paint engine that generates JS (meaning QML 2 and the
scene graph is out), or you have to hook in with a OpenGL library that proxies
GL rendering commands (and texture uploads etc) into JS/WebGL. Both but
especially the latter would be tons of work.
--
Samuel
_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
