Am Sonntag, 16. März 2008 15:00:49 schrieb Ivan Gyurdiev: > I don't quite understand why it's necessary to write ARB, GLSL, and NONE > shader descriptors inside the ati_shader file. > How will this infrastructure scale to a new shader backend added a year > from now ? Currently I am doing that so ATI cards which have ARB_fp or GLSL can use the fragment replacement code and d3d pshaders at the same time. As commented in the code we can remove all but the ATIfs+ARBvp backend the day we have a ffp replacement in ARB or GLSL. Thus there's no need for that to scale, what we have here is the worst case.
> I very much like that backend-specific functionality ends up in the > appropriate backend - as per patches 10, 11, and 14. > However, it seems those patches stand on their own, independent of the > rest of the patchset and this feature. You're right, the shader model changes do not really need the ATIfs code to work. However, separating them would be quite a pain, and I do not see any gain from that beyong the point where the patches are applied. It won't affect regression testing really. The reason why I wrote it that way was that I needed an implementation of an ffp replacement to see where the whole thing goes. I couldn't do that with the existing nvts code because nvrc+nvts are quite different from arb/glsl/atifs and as described in the other mail putting that code into a separate shader backend won't help us much.
