om2

36 ms·

361.
by om2 10y ago
We think the eventual shader language will not be based on MSL. We need both source and binary formats, and MSL doesn't even have a public binary format at this time. However, if we do end up with something MSL-inspired, the same commi
362.
by om2 10y ago
Why don't you ask Microsoft what they think about this proposal instead of speculating?
363.
by om2 10y ago
The Metal Shader Language use in our prototype is totally a placeholder, and the post says so. We expect the standards process to define new source and binary representations, possibly based on Khronos's SPIR-V. The shader language is
364.
by om2 10y ago
Yes, you can submit a command buffer more than once, with modified parameters.
365.
by om2 10y ago
The best 3D standard for the web is one that can be delivered cross-platform with high performance, high quality, and no need for end-user driver installs. And that can be made safe and secure without losing too much performance. In explori
366.
by om2 10y ago
I agree with you that a cross-browser standard is the right thing. We worked hard to bring all the interested parties to the table to kick off this standards effort. What the output looks like remains to be seen.
367.
by om2 10y ago
We did evaluate the option of using Vulkan. So have others. It's not even necessarily off the table, we just don't think it is the best design approach. If you are very interested in the details of API design choices, then I'
368.
by om2 10y ago
Do you have any evidence for your claim that Vulkan is best? Metal and D3D 12 are also low-level APIs designed for performance. I've seen no evidence that Vulkan is better on platforms where there are drivers for two different APIs.
369.
by om2 10y ago
As it happens, OpenGL was so high level that supporting it on top of DirectX was feasible. A number of Windows browsers use the DirectX back end to ANGLE, so users don't have to download OpenGL drives. Unfortunately, that doesn't
370.
by om2 10y ago
https://www.lunarg.com/faqs/microsoft-support-vulkan/ Microsoft won't support Vulkan officially, and apps would have to install their own Vulkan drivers.
371.
by om2 10y ago
I think you'll want to talk to Apple Developer Relations and see if they can put you in touch with the teams responsible for the GPU-level stuff. We as the browser team can't do much with this feedback.
372.
by om2 10y ago
I don't think browsers will choose to pipe this through Vulkan drivers on Windows (since they are all unofficial and in general don't have as complete coverage) and I don't think they'd choose to use unofficial Vulkan dr
373.
by om2 10y ago
If you draw a 2-dimensional chart of low-levelness vs performance, Vulkan, DirectX12 and Metal are all higher performance and lower-level than OpenGL. Metal is a bit higher level than the others and Vulkan is probably the lowest level, but
374.
by om2 10y ago
We haven't yet solved all the security problems, but we're aware of and thinking about them. We expect threadsafety, memory safety, data validation, and memory protection for the shader language to be the big issues.
375.
by om2 10y ago
Sounds like you're focused on what is best for Vulkan, not what is best for the web.
376.
by om2 10y ago
Turns out that you don't have to bend over backwards if you're already supporting Vulkan and DirectX 12. But still, the ability to run your awesome 3D web apps on Apple platforms seems to be a good reason to support a Metal back e
377.
by om2 10y ago
Vulkan on Windows is all based on unofficial drivers that don't come with Windows and aren't supported by MS. We don't think it's right to depend on this even if it's theoretically possible. Likewise for unofficial
378.
by om2 10y ago
I think you are wrong on that. Vulkan is a low-level native API, not a JavaScript API for the web. Lots of design work needs to be done. In addition, even on platforms where there are unofficial Vulkan drivers (such as Windows), it's l
379.
by om2 10y ago
I don't get what you are suggesting. Apple supporting Vulkan on macOS and iOS wouldn't do anything to expose a new GPU API to the web. They are totally orthogonal. We're expecting work on the new web API to be super collabora
380.
by om2 10y ago
We expect DirectX 12 drivers to be more complete, more performant, and more likely to be available out of the box without a separate install. We expect Windows browsers will want to build on top of DirectX, not Vulkan.
381.
by om2 10y ago
That's one of the benefits of designing an API for the web from the get-go, instead of just literally copying an API that's meant to be used from C. It makes for a cleaner and nicer API, even though some lower-level details are ex
382.
by om2 10y ago
Modern graphics APIs help you reduce the CPU bottleneck for CPU-bound graphics code. Parallelism, command buffers and generally thinner drivers all help reduce the CPU overhead.
383.
by om2 10y ago
We're committed to abiding by the W3C Patent Policy for this spec.
384.
by om2 10y ago
Is that really a "just" or is it the right thing to do? Working on top of all the major APIs is the right thing for the web. We've discussed our proposal a lot with key players in this space (including other browsers, GPU ven
385.
by om2 10y ago
We're not complaining, we're explaining the lay of the land. Working on top of all three of these APIs is totally doable and will result in a better API for the web. Things worth noting: - We believe other browser vendors agree wi
386.
by om2 10y ago
Our proposal is a little higher-level than Vulkan but it's the same basic idea.
387.
by om2 10y ago
Safari has one of the best Web Components implementations, with excellent Shadow DOM and Custom Elements compliant to the latest spec in the Safari 10.1 beta. These are the two most essential Web Components specs. By comparison, Edge doesn&
388.
by om2 10y ago
We try to prioritize bugs that block livability for STP. Do you know if there's a bug filed on the JIRA thing so I can get folks to follow up?
389.
by om2 10y ago
All the things xenadu02 mentioned have shipped in previous Safari releases. In some cases last year, in other cases weveral years ago.
390.
by om2 10y ago
We're moved to shipping new web developer features twice a year. That's not near as often as Chrome but still a big improvement to once a year, solely with the major OS releases. This release also has a ton of compatibility and st

More ›