3 ms·
Vulkan may be easy to use one day, but it will probably be because you are "writing vulkan" but actually using an impressive set of libraries, languages and oth
by sounds 4y ago
Vulkan may be easy to use one day, but it will probably be because you are "writing vulkan" but actually using an impressive set of libraries, languages and other tooling that do stuff for you that you don't want to do.
- cyber_kinetist 4y agoPeople have said this since the early days of Vulkan (such as https://aras-p.info/blog/2015/03/13/thoughts-on-explicit-graphics-apis/ https://aras-p.info/blog/2015/03/13/thoughts-on-explicit-gra...), but so far nothing has really materialized.
- johnnyanmac 4y agoguess it depends on how specialized to vulkan you mean. Like, Aras in this article even mentioned BGFX as a potential abstracted library, and I'm 99.9% certain that it supports vulkan now. But you can certainly argue that with BGFX you're not "writing vulkan". But if you wanted something that was "vulkan but without 1000 lines to make a triangle", that's what Open GL was trying to be 25 years ago. So Vulkan naturally diverged from that model after seeing the weaknesses. I'm unsure if there's any maintained package trying to wrap this stuff; that's something a graphics engineer would end up doing anyways.