Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] MR174: Consolidate the TPF and d3dbc handling code.

[Giovanni Mascellani (＠giomasce)]

> This is what I originally thought, but I'm having slight second thoughts now. The thing is that the tradeoff is now you need a new IR for every bytecode language you have, which in our case means at least sm1, sm4, and eventually I think sm6. That's a lot of extra support code to add. Consider how much we'd need to add by putting that intermediate step into HLSL -> smX translation. The advantage of making v_s_i the IR is that you don't actually need any of that.

You mean that you'd have just `v_s_i` and every frontend and backend deals directly with it, including for very syntactical things like assembling and disassembling? I don't feel really convinced, it seems to me that you'd have to encode su much stuff in `v_s_i` that each time you need to change something (for example to allow for a new language) the changes can have repercussions in each other language frontend or backend.

-- 
https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/vkd3d/-/merge_requests/174#note_31723