Intel Continues Advancing OpenGL GLSL Support

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Intel Continues Advancing OpenGL GLSL Support

Intel Open-Source Technology Center developers continue advancing support for the OpenGL Shading Language. Their latest work is on supporting Interface Blocks for GLSL 1.50...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTMyNjM

[halfmanhalfamazing]

Hopefully Intel and other Mesa developers will have OpenGL 3.2 + GLSL 1.50 support firmly in place within the next five months so that the next release will be Mesa 10.0 with official GL 3.2 compliance.

It will be GL 3.2 and 3.3. According to the "Status of OpenGL 3.x features in Mesa" file on freedesktop.org:

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/tree/docs/GL3.txt

The last remaining feature needed for full 3.3 compatibility is "pretty much done". (I suspect that they're waiting on whatever's missing from GLSL1.5)

[elanthis]

It will be GL 3.2 and 3.3. According to the "Status of OpenGL 3.x features in Mesa" file on freedesktop.org:

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/tree/docs/GL3.txt

The last remaining feature needed for full 3.3 compatibility is "pretty much done". (I suspect that they're waiting on whatever's missing from GLSL1.5)

GL 3.3 requires GLSL 3.30, not just 1.50. The changes are likely doable, but I wouldn't be too surprised if they'er not done. Hopefully they are, GLSL 3.30 is when it started to get bearable to use.

[GreatEmerald]

It will be GL 3.2 and 3.3. According to the "Status of OpenGL 3.x features in Mesa" file on freedesktop.org:

Maybe they'll skip Mesa 10.0 and go directly to Mesa 11.0?

[Veerappan]

GL 3.3 requires GLSL 3.30, not just 1.50. The changes are likely doable, but I wouldn't be too surprised if they'er not done. Hopefully they are, GLSL 3.30 is when it started to get bearable to use.

And according to the GL3.txt document, the GLSL new 3.30 features are basically done. I haven't looked at the code (or maybe it's in a branch somewhere), but supposedly the GLSL 3.30 features are almost finished. Who knows, that line of the document has been that way for a while, so maybe someone's already finished the necessary changes and not updated the document.

[Kayden]

Maybe they'll skip Mesa 10.0 and go directly to Mesa 11.0? :D

Oh, believe me, we've thought about it! :D The FAQ entry alone would be hilarious: "Why is there no Mesa 10?" ... "Q: Why didn't you just make Mesa 10 louder?" "A: uh...This Mesa goes to 11..."

We'll have to see. :) If nothing else, it was hilarious to talk about.

[curaga]

It has to one-up DX versioning, thus the next version must be Mesa Black.

[brosis]

Oh, believe me, we've thought about it! The FAQ entry alone would be hilarious: "Why is there no Mesa 10?" ... "Q: Why didn't you just make Mesa 10 louder?" "A: uh...This Mesa goes to 11..."

We'll have to see. If nothing else, it was hilarious to talk about.

Kayden, guys, please, we want discreet card that works on your awesome open drivers. Badly! : ((

[halfmanhalfamazing]

Kayden, guys, please, we want discreet card that works on your awesome open drivers. Badly! : ((

[brosis]

[IMG ]http://www.vgamuseum.info/images/stories/vlask/ostatni/i7404mfb.jpg[ /IMG]

740 is voodoo era, mate