On 17/03/2008, Stefan Dösinger stefan@codeweavers.com wrote:
Am Sonntag, 16. März 2008 17:35:25 schrieb Ivan Gyurdiev:
To me this suggests that there should be two separate shader backends, selected differently for "fixed pipeline replacement" purposes and for shaders. I don't like the argument that this is only an intermediate step - if no one writes the glsl/arb replacement code, it becomes permanent.
How would that work with e.g. GLSL, where vertex and fragment shaders are linked? How would you use a D3D vertex shader together with a ffp replacement fragment shader?
One of the aims of my patches is providing the infrastructure where summer of code applicants could kick in. So I think chances that we get an ARB or GLSL replacement soon are pretty good.
Personally, I'm not quite convinced of the need of an ati fragment shader ffp replacement in the first place. The functionality seems more of the level of register combiners and texture shaders.
Also, all the cards that are powerful enough to support a shader implementation of fixed function processing support GLSL vertex and fragment shaders, so realistically all you really need is a GLSL ffp replacement.
On the subject of GSoC, I'm somewhat sceptical.