[Public WebGL] Some WebGL draft feedback
Wed Jan 13 18:22:44 PST 2010
Tim Johansson wrote:
> On 2010-01-13 20:43, Kenneth Russell wrote:
>> Incorrect rendering. The exception checks would have the same
>> performance and tentacle-spreading issues I raised before.
>> I don't think incorrect rendering results are an acceptable
>> alternative. I also dispute whether the check to see if the given
>> rendering context is "current" upon each graphics call would have any
>> perceptible performance impact. We currently have and need such
>> checks in the WebGL implementations for Safari and Chrome and they
>> are negligible in cost.
> I agree that incorrect rendering is not good as it is not well
> specified. If an implementation manages to get it looking right
> without calling the sync function that behavior will quickly become
> required since many authors will forget to call the sync functions.
> That means the check is required and I don't see any real benefit of
> requiring a sync function to be called instead of just syncing
> implicitly. IMO we should not add functions to make authors think
> about everything that might be slow in some implementations.
The only implementation that would render correctly without
synchronization is one where all graphics API's are implemented in
software running on a single processor together with the application,
i.e. no parallelism possible. This is also the only kind of
implementation where everything would not slow down when mixing APIs.
Such an implementation is extremely unlikely.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 398 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the public_webgl