Live data from Hacker News

Direct3D to OpenGL abstraction layer

github.com

61–70 of 111 posts

Re: Direct3D to OpenGL abstraction layer

#61
post #48

Limited subset of Direct3D 9.0c

Now that I'm reading that ... isn't every subset of a finite set itself finite (and thus limited)?

I'm not a native English speaker, but I think in colloquial terms, "limited" means "smaller than you might want" or something like that.

Re: Direct3D to OpenGL abstraction layer

#62

This is huge, really huge for anyone who write DirectX games and want to make them run on OSX/Linux. This is basically what a part of Wine do, am I wrong?

I don't see why this is so "huge". Maybe you could explain? I think developing OpenGL-Games or porting them was never a big issues. Most 3d engines today even have those abstraction layers included anyway.

Most of the big off-the-shelf engines (Unreal/Unity/CryTek/Source) do. If you look at first-party engines, though (Square Enix has Crystal Tools, EA has Frostbite, Monolith has LithTech, Activision has their IW engine for the CoD games), they're likely to be DirectX and console targeting. Valve is giving those kinds of engines the capability of targeting OpenGL through their existing DirectX support.

Re: Direct3D to OpenGL abstraction layer

#63
post #58

For the interested, google's Angle is the opposite : https://code.google.com/p/angleproject/

Now someone needs to start a project to find a large, documented subset for which ANGLE(ToGL(x)) = x so we can all get rid of this historical two-standards-that-do-exactly-the-same-thing nonsense.

well one of them isn't a standard so should be ignored

Re: Direct3D to OpenGL abstraction layer

#64
post #13

Not sure here but don't all major engines already support OpenGL ootb ? Basically any engine thats runs on PS3/PS4 does like UnrealEngine, Cryengine, idTech, Unity and most indie/open source engines are OpenGL anyway. All engines that target Android/iOS are OpenGL too. Even for things like XNA which was Xbox/DirectX only there is MonoGame to port it to *nix platforms easily. So if you have rolled your own DirectX-onl…

I have rolled several of my own DirectX-only engines, so I'm guessing that no, most people probably do not.

I always wrote them so that all DirectX and Windows specific code was abstracted behind platform-agnostic generic interfaces. So, in theory, OpenGL support would be as simple as coding an OpenGL implementation of my generic graphics API. Probably a day or two's work, but I haven't had a compelling reason to do the OpenGL implementation yet.

Re: Direct3D to OpenGL abstraction layer

#65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PS3/PS4 commercial games do not use OpenGL and never have. This myth needs to die. http://scalibq.wordpress.com/2010/05/15/sony%E2%80%99s-plays...

"the advantage of a console: hardware is fixed". YEP! Why use an abstraction layer when you can just code to the metal.

Because if your game later has a HD remake by developers not as smart as you it'll run worse on much more powerful hardware, like with Zone of Enders 2

Not being serious but it was interesting that happened

Re: Direct3D to OpenGL abstraction layer

#66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>OpenGL is years behind D3D (not DirectX, it's not comparable!) in many areas, Explain please?

Complete lack of multicore rendering. You can practically issue render commands only from one thread. And there is no way to save bunch of commands anymore as display lists were deprecated. Also it's still very much state machine based. So you have to do a lot of individual calls to set everything up for actual draw call. I personally love OpenGL and use it on my work. However this is one of the biggest drawbacks on…

No clue what multicore rendering D3D offers, but 'complete lack' is an overstatement.

OpenGL has context sharing, which means several contexts in different threads sharing the same objects. You can issue commands as long as you synchronise access to objects yourself. In practice, that means filling buffers, rendering to an off-screen framebuffer, etc. from other threads.

Re: Direct3D to OpenGL abstraction layer

#67
post #58

For the interested, google's Angle is the opposite : https://code.google.com/p/angleproject/

Now someone needs to start a project to find a large, documented subset for which ANGLE(ToGL(x)) = x so we can all get rid of this historical two-standards-that-do-exactly-the-same-thing nonsense.

All that reminds me of is this: https://xkcd.com/927/

Re: Direct3D to OpenGL abstraction layer

#68
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see why this is so "huge". Maybe you could explain? I think developing OpenGL-Games or porting them was never a big issues. Most 3d engines today even have those abstraction layers included anyway.

its not a big deal... its just that most game code is hidden and buried so that most of the loud opinions and i have to say its good to see this but i'm mildly disappointed too... DirectX --> OpenGL is one thing, but a properly cross platform rendering interface that will work with DX, its flavour on 360, the novelties of Win8 and Xbone as well as PS3 gcm and gx/gx2 on nintendo platforms whilst dealing with the quirk…

fyi i meant to delete 'so that most of the loud opinions and'

Re: Direct3D to OpenGL abstraction layer

#69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PS3/PS4 commercial games do not use OpenGL and never have. This myth needs to die. http://scalibq.wordpress.com/2010/05/15/sony%E2%80%99s-plays...

"the advantage of a console: hardware is fixed". YEP! Why use an abstraction layer when you can just code to the metal.

Many games run on multiple consoles.

Re: Direct3D to OpenGL abstraction layer

#70
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now someone needs to start a project to find a large, documented subset for which ANGLE(ToGL(x)) = x so we can all get rid of this historical two-standards-that-do-exactly-the-same-thing nonsense.

All that reminds me of is this: https://xkcd.com/927/

Relevant XKCD: http://dynamic.xkcd.com/random/comic/
Post reply on HN