3 ms·
> Google and Samsung had to adapt Microsoft's HLSL compiler to target SPIR-V, because plenty of game developers weren't willing to write GLSL, or to port their
by skohan 7y ago
> Google and Samsung had to adapt Microsoft's HLSL compiler to target SPIR-V, because plenty of game developers weren't willing to write GLSL, or to port their shaders.
What is your argument here exactly? Isn't it one of the stated benefits of Vulkan, that because of SPIR-V as a shader language, developers can choose whatever high-level language they write to implement shaders in?
If developers can target Vulkan without re-writing their shaders that seems like a sign of strength not a sign of weakness.
- pjmlp 7y agoIt is a weakness, because they had to adopt the competition's shading language, as they weren't able to improve their own. Also in the age of middleware, Vulkan is only a checkbox away, so unless one is writing game engines, it is quite irrelevant. For example, OctaneRender gave up on the Vulkan backend and replaced their prototype with Optix 7. I bet no one on the VFX movie industry will care one second about their change.
- skohan 7y agoIt's like you didn't even read my comment edit: just for the record, pjlmp added everything after the 1st line to his comment after I posted this response
- pjmlp 7y agoI did, not being able to offer something better than the competition is a weakness, regardless of the opportunities that SPIR-V allows for.
- skohan 7y agoGLSL is not part of Vulkan's value proposition and has no bearing on Vulkan's success. The competitive feature which Vulkan offers is it's non-proprietary nature and crosss-platform support. If it can deliver that with the same or better performance as proprietary solutions, and offering developers more choice about which language they want to implement shaders in, this is a clear win for Vulkan.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]