That pretty much what I meant, you just explained it in a clearer way... I only had a minute or so to type it in heh. The irony here is I was writing it while playing WoW via wine through opengl... The factor of irony is overwhelming =P. I basically agree. I figured (without actually looking at it) that d3d was a shared code-base of some kind with the individual dx dlls basically pointing here and there for the nuggety center. Now just throwing up a (pretty much) mock up of d3d10 or dx10 in general would be great, it would atleats give a little structure, and as you said ease the code to a new structure if need be.
On 3/10/07, Stefan Dösinger <stefandoesinger@gmx.at> wrote:
Am Sonntag 11 März 2007 00:06 schrieb Bryan Haskins:
> I'm no actual dev here by any means, but I think anything more than setting
> up the extreme basics would take away from the work done on 8, and 9. As
> not much uses 10 yet it would be a bit premature to do a ton of work on it.
> Porting the current code if only to the point of 10 working as well as 9 or
> 8 without the fancy new calls would suffice for now, and yes, I also think
> we should have a Vista version if only for the sake of consistency, it
> wouldn't really be any different than XP for us at the core just throwing
> the tag up there.
The idea is that our main Direct3D engine, wined3d, is shared between all
Direct3D versions, from Direct3D 1 to Direct3D10. Admitadely, the core
functionality that is equal between d3d1 and d3d10 is comparably small, and
the part that exists should work pretty well by now. But work on d3d10 games
can definitly fix bugs in d3d9 apps accidentally, in the same way the d3d7
merge fixed bugs in wined3d that affected d3d9 apps.
Also consider that d3d10 may need some architectural changes to wined3d. I
think it is better to make them now and when further optimizing it have
things in the d3d10 style than to drive everything to d3d9 and see in a year
that we have to turn a few core parts upside down.
Of course having one SoC project on d3d10 does not exclude someone else who
wants to do something do a SoC project on d3d9 :-) . Ideas would be Overlay
support for movie players or the d3dx9_xy helper DLLs(Although those are
maybe out of scope for wine). Or even a completely different area of DirectX.
DirectSound, DirectPlay, ...
> I say focus SoC on 8 and 9, imagine having a more complete 8 and 9 then 10
> would be cake, as I understand it all it does it add new calls right? And
> possibly dig up the theming zombie, so we might have that finally lol.
One problem is nowadays that wined3d is pretty advanced already, and the
learning curve is rather hard already. D3D10 is in my eyes an oportunity of
an exciting project which allows a new developer to grow into wined3d. I
personally won't start hacking on d3d10 immediately, I'll continue to work on
d3d9 and below apps. The state of d3d9 does not justify that yet.
And I think that *Direct3D* isn't in a bad shape nowadays. We recently had a
nice success when that new Command and Conquer game came out, and ran on the
day it hit the shelves. Wine is getting the public opinion that it does
better on games than Cedega. What we should not shout our loudly is the shape
of other DirectX stuff. DirectSound is an issue, although I must say that
Maarten Lankhorst is doing nice work on winealsa :-)
--
Cheers,
Bryan