OpenGL 3 Updates

[santyhamer]

Btw, anybody know if Intel gonna be an important part of Evans? Is in Khronos trying to change things for Larrabee/G45? Just curious...

[Cgor_Cyrosly]

Whether the array texture and FBO functions will become the part of the core of GL3.0?

Array textures are part of Mt Evans. FBOs are part of 3.0.

Thanks for korval!
Whether contains the layerer rendering function of the FBO scope of GL3.0 which as like as the extension fucntions "glFramebufferTextureLayerEXT/glFramebufferTextureFaceEXT",but it likes must be supported array texture before it can be used.
Others about the "text buffer object" of GLSL1.3,I think the function
is :when compiling the shader code,the assemebly or machine code of compiled is put in a charactor buffer before execute and will be loaded form the buffer when runtime(so the shader source can be compiled at any time and used and shared by other programs at same time)?
thanks

[davej]

I disagree with that definition.
True, there's only one implementation of DirectX (which is its main weakness). But there are multiple implementations of the driver backend, so perhaps the difference isn't *that* big after all?
I'd say that DirectX is a standard for Windows development. It's not an *open* standard, true, not everyone can make their own implementations of it, but it's still a standard for the more limited scope that is "3d stuff on Windows". It's an API as well, yes, but it's a de facto standard that's hard to ignore.

I disagree with your definition of standard.

DOC, XLS and PPT files are de facto standards as there are independent implementations of them - that is not something that applies to DirectX [1]. The fact that there is a well defined interface for IHVs to write backends to does not make it a standard either - they are not usable without Microsoft's implementation of the rest of DirectX. It's an API that's hard to ignore but it's not a standard.

Microsoft may call it a standard but they call applications cross platform because they run on different versions of Windows.

[1] The Wine project has made some efforts but they are about emulating Windows rather than providing DirectX as an API for Linux applications. They also aren't complete implementations.

[Vexator]

so far fbo's can have multiple color atachments, but only one depth attachment. will gl3 support fbo's with multiple depth attachments?

[Lindley]

What use do you have in mind for multiple depth attachments?

[MZ]

Two sided depth test, for example. This would allow doing depth peeling without totally disabling all early-Z optimizations (as it happens currently, when we emulate the missing second depth test by shadow map + discard). Obviously, this would require new HW.

[Lindley]

Well, I'd be in favor of anything that gave the user more control over early-z, so sure.

[Cgor_Cyrosly]

Will be supported create shaders form assemebly code in GL3.0?
Very hope for can be used direct in GLSL1.3 like this:
asm{...}
or asm_vertex{...}
asm_geometry{...}
asm_fragment{...}
or asm.geometry("shader code")
thanks!!!
If like this mode: "FragmentShader[id]={"code"},
it will easier for create and management multi-shaders and traversing multi-pass through the id in one file

[Xmas]

so far fbo's can have multiple color atachments, but only one depth attachment. will gl3 support fbo's with multiple depth attachments?

When (and if) hardware comes around that supports this there's still time to create an extension.

Will be supported create shaders form assemebly code in GL3.0?

No, GLSL reserves the "asm" keyword "for future use" but it won't define an assembly language.

[Cgor_Cyrosly]

Will be supported create shaders form assemebly code in GL3.0?

No, GLSL reserves the "asm" keyword "for future use" but it won't define an assembly language.

Thanks for Xmas,but supporting for "GL_NV_gpu_program4"?If ture,how to use assemebly shaders in GL3 programs? glGenProgramsARB,... can be used still?