For what it's worth, although the idea of not starting with a
clean state has its advantages (not in the least being able
to support D3D10 software in a short time frame) I think
that the clean slate argument wins out for me overall.
Yes, it's more work in the short term, but I can't help
thinking
Am Samstag, 18. August 2007 19:59 schrieb Ivan Gyurdiev:
> The shader stuff uses two different backends and an intermediate
> interface (SHADER_OPCODE_ARG) to isolate the asm parser. Other parts of
> wined3d could do the same thing - you are interface constrained from the
> top (d3d) and from the b
H. Verbeet wrote:
On 18/08/07, Roderick Colenbrander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From what I have seen GL3 is very different. It would be like maintaining a
GTK and a QT backend in one library. They use very different calls
(glBegin/glEnable and so are gone), need different WGL contexts and so
Am Samstag, 18. August 2007 14:34 schrieb H. Verbeet:
> > My suggestion would be to create a new wined3d with the same interface as
> > the current wined3d. If needed ddraw/d3d8/d3d9 can use this wined3d too.
> > Personally I would add d3d9ex.dll like on Vista which can use
> > wined3d-gl3.
>
> I c
On 18/08/07, Roderick Colenbrander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From what I have seen GL3 is very different. It would be like maintaining a
> GTK and a QT backend in one library. They use very different calls
> (glBegin/glEnable and so are gone), need different WGL contexts and so on.
>
> Sure in c
On Saturday 18 August 2007 13:59, H. Verbeet wrote:
> What it comes down to is that there are two things we have to make a
> decision about:
> - Do we want to support GL3 in the existing wined3d?
> - Do we want to support D3D10 on top of the existing wined3d?
>
> I've got a slight preference to
What it comes down to is that there are two things we have to make a
decision about:
- Do we want to support GL3 in the existing wined3d?
- Do we want to support D3D10 on top of the existing wined3d?
I've got a slight preference towards at least trying to support both
with the same wined3d, mo
The decision on what to do for a big part depends on what OpenGL 3.0 actually
is. From carefully reading the latest OpenGL 3.0 announcements and their
forums I come to the conclusion which I'll explain below.
There are basically two new OpenGL versions named respectively: Longs Peak,
and Mt. E
For the most part that nicely sums up the problem :-). One
consideration that I think should be added to that list is that we
probably want to be able to run at least d3d8 and d3d9, and possibly
ddraw, on top of GL 3.
Hi,
In the past days there was a bit of discussion about the implementation design
of our future d3d10 implementation. The major question was wether we should
make a clean start over with opengl 3.0, or extend wined3d for d3d10.
A few facts:
*) D3D10 is a clean restart without any backwards comp
10 matches
Mail list logo
