2008/12/8 Stefan Dösinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> > I don't think that would work well. We would need some shader model >> specific private data in each context(e.g. last vertexshader and last >> vertexdeclaration) to allow the shader backend to find out what to do, >> since the dirty state information won't suffice if the shader backend >> doesn't know where it was called from. >> > >> Why not? > How does e.g. ARB find out wether it has to reapply the pixelshader? Or how > does GLSL find out if it has to apply a new GLSL program. > I would expect the relevant state to be dirty, but you say this depends on where the function is called from?
>> I would argue that since shaders replace vertex and/or fragment >> states, we shouldn't have to go through the state management for >> replaced pipeline stages in the first place. > And I argue that this should be the implementation's decision. (Read: The > state manager and context.c should not treat some states specially) > Well, you can hardly argue that eg. vertex shader enable is a proper vertex state to begin with.
