AMD Proposes New OpenGL Advanced Frame-Buffer Multi-Sample Extension

[phoronix]

Phoronix: AMD Proposes New OpenGL Advanced Frame-Buffer Multi-Sample Extension

In between hacking on patches to RadeonSI Gallium3D for better performance and new functionality, AMD's prolific Mesa contributor Marek Olsak has written a new OpenGL extension...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=AMD_framebuffer_multisample_adv

[Vash63]

Is this where we drop uninformed opinions about how vendor specific graphics extensions are evil and AMD is killing the API?

[kpedersen]

Is this where we drop uninformed opinions about how vendor specific graphics extensions are evil and AMD is killing the API?

Yes!!

... but I can't really think of anything. Things are actually getting quite good at the moment...

Perhaps if we didn't have Nouveau I would have a little moan about the Nvidia binary blob but this doesn't really have much to do with AMD or GL extensions.

Man! OpenGL 3 was such a disappointment back in 2008 though wasn't it? Leaving in all that "compatibility profile" stuff. What were they thinking!

[schmidtbag]

Is this where we drop uninformed opinions about how vendor specific graphics extensions are evil and AMD is killing the API?

Is this where we passive-aggressively exaggerate the opinions of others in the hopes of creating a needlessly toxic community?

[starshipeleven]

Is this where we passive-aggressively exaggerate the opinions of others in the hopes of creating a needlessly toxic community?

Nah, it's where we show everyone how butthurt we are because someone proved us wrong.

[schmidtbag]

Nah, it's where we show everyone how butthurt we are because someone proved us wrong.

I'm not butthurt about being wrong. I openly admitted to it. My gripe is how people (like you in particular) handled it: poorly.
Smitty explained very concisely and politely how I was wrong, and at the very least, understood my point, even if he didn't agree. You, meanwhile, were not concise, you were rude, and you deliberately ignored why I may have thought the way I did and chose to attack it.

[starshipeleven]

I'm not butthurt about being wrong. I openly admitted to it.

Yeah, after 3 posts of different people repeating the same thing to you and not taking the bait of your usual shifting of goalposts, but posting raw facts in your face.

You, meanwhile, were not concise, you were rude, and you deliberately ignored why I may have thought the way I did and chose to attack it.

I confirm the "rude", the "ignored why bla bla" and the "chose to attack it", but I was concise and precise, I also pulled up data to back up my claims when asked to.
Please get your facts straight.

[schmidtbag]

Yeah, after 3 posts of different people repeating the same thing to you and not taking the bait of your usual shifting of goalposts, but posting raw facts in your face.

As stated several times, my goalpost remained in the same position, but you keep thinking it's somewhere else. In case you're not aware - that's pretty much the reason why arguments happen in the first place: it's a misunderstanding of where the goalposts are. Any time you thought it was moved is because you weren't understanding where it was in the first place.
Also, stop exaggerating how bad the situation was. I "took the bait" from Smitty, and VikingGe was doing a crappy job at his explaination. Then there's you, who failed on 3 accounts: you were making false assumptions (such as claiming I thought the extensions were private), you were drawing unnecessary attention to irrelevant details (such as that false assumption), and you supported the entire premise of my original thought:

There are some extensions that are hardware-specific and of course won't ever be used by other vendors, or even the same vendor in different generations of GPUs.

This is the kind of thing I was complaining about from the very beginning. It's unnecessary to officiate an extension that has a high probability of being obsoleted, and, one that nobody else has the any interest in adopting. This is exactly what happened - to my knowledge, nobody but Nvidia supported VK_NV_glsl_shader and it eventually got removed due to obsolescence. But, like you usually do, you'd rather generalize everything I say, conceive it in the most asinine way possible, and find the most antagonistic way to ridicule it. Y'know what constructive criticism is, right? Because that's what Smitty had, and this is why he succeeded in the debate whereas you didn't (well, unless the sole purpose of you arguing with people is to annoy people, in which case, good job).

As stated before, this isn't that big of a deal. It doesn't warrant a multi-thread argument. I may have had a wrong way of thinking (again - it was just an opinion) but you're the one who escalated this. You've been around here long enough to know that I'm very likely to respond to unnecessary cynicism.

I also pulled up data to back up my claims when asked to.

Actually you didn't - I asked for something more specific than what you gave me. That would be an easy way for me to accuse you of moving the goalpost, but that'd be hypocritical.

[Guest]

Yes!!

... but I can't really think of anything. Things are actually getting quite good at the moment...

Perhaps if we didn't have Nouveau I would have a little moan about the Nvidia binary blob but this doesn't really have much to do with AMD or GL extensions.

Man! OpenGL 3 was such a disappointment back in 2008 though wasn't it? Leaving in all that "compatibility profile" stuff. What were they thinking!

I tried learning OpenGL 3.3, and was annoyed at how non-object oriented OpenGL is - it would be much easier to use, if they introduced shaders and textures as C++ objects, instead of some vague object ID that we have to bind to the context first.........

[kpedersen]

I understand the importance of OpenGL having a C API rather than a C++ one (i.e easier to bind to other languages) but yes, its state machine driven system (which it still uses mind) did make it easy to shoot yourself in the foot. Admittedly DirectX was nicer to write (although not nice to maintain once i.e DirectX 9 died).
Since C can do object orientation, I tended to just wrap things in a small layer.

Interestingly Vulkan has a "semi-official" C++ bindings. Though writing software using Vulkan directly is quite fiddly in the first place