On Mar 5, 2011, at 3:59 PM, David Herman wrote: >> A big favourite of mine (I'm biased, though...) is the Eigen2 library >> (LGPL3+): > > I can't speak for other browser vendors, but I think that license isn't > compatible with Mozilla's codebase. But thanks for the reference. > >> Using the small, fixed size subset of that lib and exporting the >> interface to ECMAScript should give perfect coverage > > Can you be more explicit about what you mean by "perfect coverage?" What set > of use cases are you trying to address? Are we talking specifically 3D > graphics? If that's the case, it's not clear whether that's really > appropriate for the ECMAScript spec. As I say, we standardize very few > libraries, usually just the smallest set needed to provide core functionality. > > Just looking around, there are already lots of WebGL matrix libraries out > there: > > http://www.google.com/search?q=webgl+matrix+library > >> BTW: The big break though the GeForce graphic cards brought, was that >> those operations went from the CPU to the GPU. > > Then again, WebGL is already exposing the GPU to JS programmers. IANA GPU > expert, but can you not already farm out matrix math to the GPU via GLSL?
Sure, but why? Latency to go to the GPU sucks, having to pack your data in GPU-specific structures sucks, etc., etc. GLSL may only be a win if all the other work you want to do is also going to happen on-GPU. > As I say, I'll look into this, but a standardized matrix library doesn't seem > as high priority to me as the rest of the binary data spec. > > Dave > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > es-discuss@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss -- Alex Russell slightly...@google.com slightly...@chromium.org a...@dojotoolkit.org BE03 E88D EABB 2116 CC49 8259 CF78 E242 59C3 9723 _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
