3 ms·
Actually, Chrome's WebGL implementation is somewhat inefficient since another process actually talks to the driver (separate process from the one executing JS).
by randallu 14y ago
Actually, Chrome's WebGL implementation is somewhat inefficient since another process actually talks to the driver (separate process from the one executing JS).
This shouldn't matter if you can factor your render loop into uploading textures and vertices infrequently and having the majority of frames consist of setting shaders and uniforms and calling drawArrays...
- krsunny 14y agoHOW DO YOU KNOW ALL THIS GAHHH!!!!! I WANT TO KNOW THESE THINGS TOOOOOO
- krsunny 14y agoReally guys? Downvotes? You can't deny how scattered good webgl info is. You may have just downvoted the next Mr. Doob. Ill remember that.
- qu4z-2 14y agoIt wasn't really a helpful contribution to the discussion, and was likely downvoted on form as much as as on content. Asking for more information about this sort of thing is good and important, but all caps and excessive exclamation marks are, I think, seen as intentionally sloppy. Take a look at the HN Guidelines, specifically the comment sections: http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html EDIT: Also, complaining about downvotes is generally seen as bad form.