Qt 3D Studio 2.4 Released With Massive Performance Boost - By Switching Away From Qt 3D

[coder]

wrapper around a standard API, they did the same thing to Vulkan to "improve" it.

You've obviously never written native Vulkan.

The only people who should use Vulkan, without any kind of wrapper library, are people building game engines, emulators, window managers, etc.

Vulkan was not designed with end-application developers in mind. It's too low-level for what an app developer actually needs or wants to care about. It's only when you want to wring every bit of performance out of the hardware, and you're willing to expend a large amount of development effort to do it, that you actually want to use native Vulkan. Otherwise, it will cost you a lot more time and effort, yet your performance will probably be worse than using OpenGL or a competent game engine.

[cl333r]

You've obviously never written native Vulkan.

The only people who should use Vulkan, without any kind of wrapper library, are people building game engines, emulators, window managers, etc.

Vulkan was not designed with end-application developers in mind. It's too low-level for what an app developer actually needs or wants to care about. It's only when you want to wring every bit of performance out of the hardware, and you're willing to expend a large amount of development effort to do it, that you actually want to use native Vulkan. Otherwise, it will cost you a lot more time and effort, yet your performance will probably be worse than using C# or a competent game engine.

You've obviously never written native C++.

The only people who should use C++, without any kind of wrapper library, are people building game engines, emulators, window managers, etc.

C++ was not designed with end-application developers in mind. It's too low-level for what an app developer actually needs or wants to care about. It's only when you want to wring every bit of performance out of the hardware, and you're willing to expend a large amount of development effort to do it, that you actually want to use C++. Otherwise, it will cost you a lot more time and effort, yet your performance will probably be worse than using C# or a competent programming language.

===========
You've obviously never written native C#.

The only people who should use C#, without any kind of wrapper library, are people building game engines, emulators, window managers, etc.

C# was not designed with end-application developers in mind. It's too low-level for what an app developer actually needs or wants to care about. It's only when you want to wring every bit of performance out of the hardware, and you're willing to expend a large amount of development effort to do it, that you actually want to use C#. Otherwise, it will cost you a lot more time and effort, yet your performance will probably be worse than using Python or a competent programming language.

==========
You've obviously never written native Python.

The only people who should use Python, without any kind of wrapper library, are people building game engines, emulators, window managers, etc.

Python was not designed with end-application developers in mind. It's too low-level for what an app developer actually needs or wants to care about. It's only when you want to wring every bit of performance out of the hardware, and you're willing to expend a large amount of development effort to do it, that you actually want to use Python. Otherwise, it will cost you a lot more time and effort, yet your performance will probably be worse than using JavaScript or a competent programming language.

[coder]

(some rubbish)

Huh. It seems like you just figured out how to use copy-and-paste. It's not really meant to be used like that - it makes you seem rather childish.

Anyway, if you're casting about for a programming language analogy, Vulkan would be closer to assembly language than any of those. Unless you really know what you're doing and invest quite a bit of time, you're likely to write slower asm than a modern compiler would generate. In the same way, OpenGL programming is both easier and likely to produce better performance.

[cl333r]

Huh. It seems like you just figured out how to use copy-and-paste. It's not really meant to be used like that - it makes you seem rather childish.

Anyway, if you're casting about for a programming language analogy, Vulkan would be closer to assembly language than any of those. Unless you really know what you're doing and invest quite a bit of time, you're likely to write slower asm than a modern compiler would generate. In the same way, OpenGL programming is both easier and likely to produce better performance.

Please keep writing, your opinions are very valuable to me.

[coder]

Please keep writing, your opinions are very valuable to me.

Sure thing.