Hi Gabor, I was thinking about this too, and I think its a good idea. The only issue is, how will this effect performance, and will there be a way to make a primitive single-buffered, if we prefer to take charge of buffering manually?
Cheers Evan On 19 Feb 2010, at 18:51, Salvatore Iaconesi wrote: > hi, > > i was thinking about implementing double buffering for pixel primitives. the > reason for this that there's an opengl restriction that you cannot use the > texture of the fbo on itself. this makes things complicated, for instance if > we want to have feedback effects, we need two pixel primitives to copy the > contents of the first one to the other. also with plugins you cannot use a > pixel primitive as input and output at the same time. it gets more cumbersome > if we would like to apply more plugins to the same pixel primitive. i believe > that double buffering would solve these issues. i was thinking to have two > textures bound to the fbo, and we could access the previous frame texture > with (pixel->ptexture) for example. the plugins would use the previous frame > texture as input and the current frame as output, and would swap them after > processing. this should not introduce any problems with the usual pixel > primitive usage. any ideas or objections about this? > > best, > gabor
