Le 02/09/2013 12:32, Nicolas Montgermont a écrit : > >>> > >>>> Le 26/07/2013 14:03, IOhannes m zmölnig a écrit : >>>> > On 07/26/13 11:44, Jack wrote: >>>> >> Hello, >>>> >> >>>> >> I would like to create GLSL abstractions in the help directory, >>>> which >>>> >> would replace pix_ objects when possible. The name would start with >>>> >> glsl_ instead of pix_. >>>> >>>> > sound good. >>>> > I was wondering, isn't a name connected to pix could be better suited? > for example > pix_alpha -> pix_alpha_sl > instead of > pix_alpha -> glsl_alpha > Cause it's here to replace pixes, no? And we can imagine having glsl > abstraction not working specially in the field of texture... > This way the help directory will be alphabetically directly ordered... > and one can imagine new pixes effect without any need for a > corresponding pix_* object > best, > n > This aspect is important. Problem : often pix_* objects are for pixes using CPU. With shaders in GLSL we deal with textures on GPU (to replace pixes). So here, a list of possibilities to replace, for example, [pix_2grey] : [glsl_2grey] (easy to find equivalent of [pix_2grey]) [tex_2grey] (also easy to find equivalent of [pix_2grey]) [glsl_tex_2grey] (quite easy to find equivalent of [pix_2grey])
Now if we need to work on vertex/fragment in the future, it would be possible to use a specific name with glsl_ and not with tex_ (which is for texture), for example if we need to change z position of vertices according to the color of a texture : [glsl_vertex_displacement] So, I think we should always start names with [glsl_]. Then, distinguish the work on texture, vertex, fragment and geometry. Then maybe something starting with : glsl_tex_* glsl_vertex_* glsl_fragment_* glsl_geometry_* ++ Jack _______________________________________________ GEM-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/gem-dev
