On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Robert Osfield <[email protected]>wrote:
> Hi Tim, > > Thanks for your patience and updating the submission. I haven't yet > purchased myself a new card. I'll order one this week and finally > I'll have the ability to test and dive into this topic. > > Cheers, > Robert. > > It's no problem. FYI, uniform buffer objects don't require a DX11 card. I'm doing my work with an NVidia 8600m. Tim > On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 6:14 AM, Tim Moore <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Robert, > > I'm resubmitting my Uniform Object Buffer patch against the current > sources, > > as I fear the original may have gone a little stale. Also, I'm not sure > if > > you were waiting for me to implement more of the "to do" list I included; > I > > haven't done that yet, as I've been waiting on the patch to be committed > :) > > Thanks, > > Tim > > > > On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Tim Moore <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Robert Osfield > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Tim, > >>> > >>> I haven't yet looked at the submission so can't comment too much on > >>> the approach. I was a bit surprised that that it was a StateAttribute > >>> approach, as I was expecting something more closely aligned to the > >>> current osg::Uniform support. > >>> > >> Yeah, me too, but the the buffer bindings are global state and not > >> something that needs to be set per program. > >>> > >>> However, I'm not too familiar with the uniform blocks so I wouldn't > >>> worry about my own expectations too much - I will have to dive into > >>> the OpenGL feature, your submission and gets some hardware+drivers > >>> that support uniforms blocks to learn about them myself. Now that > >>> NVidia have released a well balanced Fermi card I'll be upgrading to > >>> get myself some fully capable hardware, then I'll just have to work on > >>> the other distractions... > >>> > >> FYI, I'm doing the work on a 8600M. They are a core part of OpenGL 3.3, > >> which is (well?) supported on that generation of cards. > >> > >>> > >>> At my end I'm juggling a couple of different tasks, some client work > >>> improving 3D text support, shader composition and family commitments - > >>> it's school holidays now so lots days out of the office. > >>> Unfortunately this does mean that I don't have many slots available to > >>> dive into other topics. So if you feel comfortable with the approach > >>> your taking go for it, I'll try to get back and review the changes as > >>> soon as I can. > >>> > >>> Thanks for you patience, > >>> Robert. > >>> > >> No prob. > >> Tim > >> > >>> > >>> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Tim Moore <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > Hi Robert, > >>> > I'm wondering if you've had any chance to take a look at this > >>> > submission. I > >>> > know that you're heads-down in shader composition and probably don't > >>> > want to > >>> > want to think about any large submission, especially one that touches > >>> > state > >>> > management. However, this doesn't touch State, StateAttribute etc. in > >>> > any > >>> > fundamental way. I ask because I'm thinking of going forward in two > >>> > directions with this: filling in the missing features, and using the > >>> > same > >>> > approach to support transform feedback buffers. Do you have any > >>> > comments on > >>> > the basic approach? > >>> > Thanks, > >>> > Tim > >>> > > >>> > On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Tim Moore <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> >> > >>> >> Hi, > >>> >> Here is initial support for uniform buffer objects. The binding > >>> >> between a > >>> >> buffer object and an indexed target is implemented as a new > >>> >> StateAttribute, > >>> >> UniformBufferBinding. I've included an example program based on the > >>> >> code in > >>> >> the ARB_uniform_buffer_object specification. > >>> >> A few things remain to do: > >>> >> * The binding between a uniform block in a shader program and a > buffer > >>> >> indexed target number is fixed, like a vertex attribute binding. > This > >>> >> is too > >>> >> restrictive because that binding can be changed without relinking > the > >>> >> program. This mapping should be done by name in the same way that > >>> >> uniform > >>> >> values are handled i.e., like a pseudo state attribute; > >>> >> * There's no direct way yet to query for the offset of uniforms in > >>> >> uniform > >>> >> block, so only the std140 layout is really usable. A helper class > that > >>> >> implemented the std140 rules would be quite helpful for setting up > >>> >> uniform > >>> >> blocks without having to link a program first; > >>> >> * There's no direct support for querying parameters such as the > >>> >> maximum > >>> >> block length, minimum offset alignment, etc. Having that information > >>> >> available outside of the draw thread would make certain instancing > >>> >> techniques easier to implement. > >>> >> Tim > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > _______________________________________________ > >>> > osg-submissions mailing list > >>> > [email protected] > >>> > > >>> > > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-submissions-openscenegraph.org > >>> > > >>> > > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> osg-submissions mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> > >>> > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-submissions-openscenegraph.org > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > osg-submissions mailing list > > [email protected] > > > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-submissions-openscenegraph.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > osg-submissions mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-submissions-openscenegraph.org >
_______________________________________________ osg-submissions mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-submissions-openscenegraph.org
