4 ms·
> Given the quality of Khronos SDKs and stubborness to C bindings, that might not be a bad thing. None of which has anything to do with SPIR-V? It's a standard
by TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago
> Given the quality of Khronos SDKs and stubborness to C bindings, that might not be a bad thing.
None of which has anything to do with SPIR-V? It's a standardised intermediate language, not an API, and it has no dependency on Khronos tooling.
- pjmlp 7y agoIt kind of has, if Khronos never provides anything better, as it has been proven before, hardly anyone will step up to improve it, until the standard starts being put aside in preference to proprietary middleware or competing APIs.
- shmerl 7y agoThere is nothing wrong per se with SPIR-V to provide anything much better. What you said has indeed nothing to do with the intermediate language itself.
- Dylan16807 7y agoIt's relevant to what you choose to use as the standard. A language can be fine on its own terms, but also you should only install it with a layer on top and not by itself.
- shmerl 7y agoSPIR-V is fine as a standard. What you put on top and transpile into it should be completely flexible. I.e. no need to mandate higher level languages. And if anyone wants to make a better higher level language and compiler for it to generate SPIR-V, they are always welcome.