4 ms·

> Try 4096x4096 Where should I, if we keep the context of OpenGL? Apart from that, I consider this an implementation issue. My post was mostly about keeping a

> Try 4096x4096 Where should I, if we keep the context of OpenGL? Apart from that, I consider this an implementation issue. My post was mostly about keeping a consistent "front end" semantics. However the compiler or library transforms the data does not pertain to it. To be fair, I mentioned memory layout. If I had left that out, would we agree with eachother?

dannymi 4y ago
(Column|Row) Vectors and matrices are abstractions, and having abstractions that are always the same API in all of programming (not just OpenGL) would be nice. Of course making them again and again different and dumb is easier. So we got a lot of programs with weird arrays with no information on what matrix is what style. And thus readers get confused because half the information is missing in the source code! That makes things needlessly obtuse. But let's say one would try to make the API for column vectors (resp row vectors resp matrices) always the same (OpenGL or not), then it's important to look at bigger matrices. Otherwise you wouldn't care about storage layout at all and that's gonna come back to bite you in the ass (several orders of magnitude slower than possible). >But when you define a matrix in most programming languages you can only really write it like this: mat = [ [1,2,3], [4,5,6], [7,8,9] ] I wouldn't repurpose arrays like that.