4 ms·
It feels like this is something a "Web-" prefixed API should protect us from. I'm curious if such catastrophic behaviour is inherent to the WebGPU API as speci
by anentropic 5y ago
It feels like this is something a "Web-" prefixed API should protect us from.
I'm curious if such catastrophic behaviour is inherent to the WebGPU API as specified, or of the current implementation is failing to provide the level of safety that it should according to the spec?
- paulgb 5y ago> It feels like this is something a "Web-" prefixed API should protect us from. It's worth noting here that the Python wgpu library (which I'm assuming is the one GP is referring to?) is a WebGPU-inspired API to wgpu. wgpu is the library that Mozilla created as a native graphics abstraction layer to build WebGPU on top of. It's possible that Mozilla has implemented (or intends to implement) the security/validity checks between wgpu and the JavaScript interface exposed to the browser, in which case they would not automatically apply to the Python bindings.
- kvark 5y agowgpu is work in progress, we don't have all the validation in place yet. Also, it's not a Mozilla project, it's a part of gfx-rs work by Rust community.
- paulgb 5y agoThanks for the correction (and for wgpu!) Was it a Mozilla-originated project that has been moved to gfx-rx, or has if always been separate?
- kvark 5y agoWas always separate. There was a movement towards trying to make Mozilla-Central an upstream for it, but it hasn't happened. So technically right now it's a community project used by Firefox.