On Wednesday, 9 July 2014 at 04:26:55 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
Modern graphics hardware has a very well defined interface and
all modern graphics api's are all converging on matching the
hardware as close as possible. Modern graphics is done by sending
buffers of data to the card and having programmable shaders to
operate on the data, period.


That's true, but OpenGL is being left behind now that there is a push to match the low level of how GPU drivers work. Apple's Metal is oriented towards the tiled PowerVR and scenegraphs, probably also with some expectations of supporting the upcoming raytracing accelerators. AMD is in talks with Intel (rumour) with the intent of cooperating on Mantle. Direct-X is going lower level… So, there is really no stability in the API at the lower level.

But yes, OpenGL is not particularly suitable for rendering a scene graph without an optimizing engine to reduce context switches.

largely artificial. In modern graphics api's the difference
between 2D and 3D is merely a matrix multiply. If the immediate
mode was designed how I suggest above, then 2D vs 3D is a non
issue.

Actually, modern 2D APIs like Apple's Quartz are backend "independent" and render to PDF. Native PDF support is important if you want to have an advantage in the web space and in the application space in general.

There is almost no chance anyone wanting to do 3D would use something like Aurora… If you can handle 3D math you also can do OpenGL, Mantle, Metal?

But then again, the official status for Aurora is kind of unclear.

Reply via email to