4 ms·

>500 lines of busy work >simple I don't know why people think shit like this is acceptable.

by verroq 10y ago

jdright 10y ago
It is not acceptable, it is simply needed.
corysama 10y ago
Simple is not the same as easy. Vulkan is not the convenience library. Vulkan is the ugly guts of the next twenty years of convenience libraries. If you enjoy Python, thank the systems programmers who implemented it in C. When you start enjoying some future SciPy-like system, thank the systems programmers who worked through 500 lines of this stuff before they could Hello Vulkan for your convenience.
BonsaiDen 10y ago
Compared to the current situation of writing a few lines and then having to wait for a vendor specific day one graphics driver update to have your game actually running at halfway decent speed, it is simple. The current APIs are a giant collection for graphics vendor specific driver "fixes" which had been implemented initially to cheat in benchmarks, and then later had to be implement to fix issues which arose from those initial cheats. It is a giant, ugly mess. Also 95% of game developers will never ever touch a single line of vulkan because the engine developers of Unreal/Frostbite/CryEngine etc. will handle all of the "dirty work" for their abstractions to run on top of vulkan. All without the need of trying wo workaround vendor specific bug fixes etc.
frign 10y ago
Yeah, I agree. Though, Vulkan is meant to be low-level, kind of like an ASM for Graphics Cards. The euphemism of the article's title is too much though imho.
fsloth 10y ago
This sounds completely agreeable in GPU programming. It's not feasible to provide elegant one liner solutions. It's about managing a state for a quite complex piece of hardware and the exact point of Vulkan was to provide a bare-metal low-overhead API without complicated utility routines. So yes, it's supposed to be like that.

4 ms·

>500 lines of busy work >simple I don't know why people think shit like this is acceptable.

by verroq 10y ago

>500 lines of busy work >simple I don't know why people think shit like this is acceptable.

jdright 10y ago
It is not acceptable, it is simply needed.
corysama 10y ago
Simple is not the same as easy. Vulkan is not the convenience library. Vulkan is the ugly guts of the next twenty years of convenience libraries. If you enjoy Python, thank the systems programmers who implemented it in C. When you start enjoying some future SciPy-like system, thank the systems programmers who worked through 500 lines of this stuff before they could Hello Vulkan for your convenience.
BonsaiDen 10y ago
Compared to the current situation of writing a few lines and then having to wait for a vendor specific day one graphics driver update to have your game actually running at halfway decent speed, it is simple. The current APIs are a giant collection for graphics vendor specific driver "fixes" which had been implemented initially to cheat in benchmarks, and then later had to be implement to fix issues which arose from those initial cheats. It is a giant, ugly mess. Also 95% of game developers will never ever touch a single line of vulkan because the engine developers of Unreal/Frostbite/CryEngine etc. will handle all of the "dirty work" for their abstractions to run on top of vulkan. All without the need of trying wo workaround vendor specific bug fixes etc.
frign 10y ago
Yeah, I agree. Though, Vulkan is meant to be low-level, kind of like an ASM for Graphics Cards. The euphemism of the article's title is too much though imho.
fsloth 10y ago
This sounds completely agreeable in GPU programming. It's not feasible to provide elegant one liner solutions. It's about managing a state for a quite complex piece of hardware and the exact point of Vulkan was to provide a bare-metal low-overhead API without complicated utility routines. So yes, it's supposed to be like that.