hlsl2glsl

[luis.busquets at ilidium.com]

Just to add that msdn states that

"Direct3D 10 limits the use of assembly language to that of debugging
purposes only, therefore any hand written assembly shaders used in
Direct3D 9 will need to be converted to HLSL."

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb205073.aspx#Porting_Shaders

I think that the idea is that the dreiver vendor has the possibility to
implement its own compiler and adapt the code to the specifics of its
hardware. I think that translating HLSL to GLSL for D3D10 is the write
path. (For D3D9 obviously not) Therefore I think that it should be wine 's
strategy towars the implementation of this next D3D release.

> That HLSL2GLSL is written by ATI is absolutely no issue. It is released
> under
> an open source license and we can make use of the code. The philosophy you
> suggest is more of a problem.
>
> Keep in mind that getting shaders translated into GLSL, which we can then
> send
> to the card, is only a small part of the whole dx10 topic. We will need
> our
> own codepath anyway(HLSL -> d3d asm -> GLSL). We have to investigate
> wether a
> direct HLSL -> GLSL path will gain us any performance. We can optimize the
> HLSL -> d3d asm ourselves, and the d3d asm->GLSL->card native code is
> lossless in theory. If the GLSL compiler is good, then it will recognise
> the
> assembler instructions in our GLSL code and essentially we have d3d asm ->
> card native then.
>
> We will have to investigate what we gain with a 2nd direct HLSL->GLSL
> translation. I think we won't gain anything, and the effort is better
> spent
> elsewhere.
>
> Also, the card never compiles shaders. This is always done on the CPU.
>