4 ms·
That will most likely be the already mentioned WebGPU.
by WAHa_06x36 7y ago
That will most likely be the already mentioned WebGPU.
- pjmlp 7y agoThat is only for browsers.
- grovesNL 7y agoAs mentioned by flohofwoe in the parent comment, Dawn and wgpu are both native implementations of WebGPU for use outside the browser. In particular wgpu-rs will allow users to target both the browser API and run natively. Dawn and wgpu are also collaborating on a common set of native headers (https://github.com/webgpu-native/webgpu-headers https://github.com/webgpu-native/webgpu-headers) to make it easy to switch between implementations.
- pjmlp 7y agoThat is not a solution, OpenGL 4.6 with AZDO is more capable than WebGPU, just like WebGL 2.0 still lacks many of the OpenGL ES 3.2 capabilities.
- grovesNL 7y agoI think it's debatable whether WebGPU is less capable than OpenGL 4.6 with AZDO. Even if it is less capable, it doesn't mean WebGPU is not a solution nor only usable by browsers. Regardless it's the closest portable solution at the moment, and it will continue to add capabilities. The WebGPU CG has already had public meetings with Khronos to talk about running WebGPU on top of Vulkan, and running Vulkan Portability on top of WebGPU. So I think there's a lot of interest in making WebGPU succeed on both web and native targets.
- pjmlp 7y agoWhat many of us want is a high level standard that doesn't require being a driver engineer to take advantage of modern GPUs. If WebGPU ends up being as castrated as WebGL, then we either keep using OpenGL, or change to modern middleware engines (which is what most are doing), with the added benefit that they make the actual 3D API less relevant, it is just a checkbox.
- WAHa_06x36 7y agoI mean, that is exactly what WebGPU is, so I am not understanding why you are so determined to complain about it.