14 ms·
I'm not talking about today though, my concern is more around future investment. The web has to be backwards compatible, meaning that years from now, browser ve
by danielvaughn 5y ago
I'm not talking about today though, my concern is more around future investment. The web has to be backwards compatible, meaning that years from now, browser vendors will be tasked with supporting WebGL 1, WebGL 2, and WebGPU. Given that browsers are already the most complex programs in the world, is the benefit of WebGL 2 so great that it's worth it?
- whizzter 5y agoLuckily that cost is fairly small, due to how bad GL drivers were on Windows ages ago Google initiated the LibAngle project that abstracted the GLES parts needed for WebGL(1&2) onto DirectX. With much of the heavy lifting done for API support the code was then adopted as an abstraction for other low-level APIs, so iirc the recent WebGL 2 implementation that now bought us to this stage is also dependent on a fork of that lib that targets Metal. (And yes, it brings us a monoculture implementation but I'd rather have that than dozens of broken mainline OpenGL drivers from Intel, AMD and Nvidia).