DirectX 10 start as a SoC project?
the3dfxdude at gmail.com
Sun Mar 11 13:40:34 CDT 2007
On 3/10/07, Stefan Dösinger <stefandoesinger at gmx.at> wrote:
> Thinking about SoC I though that starting a DirectX 10 implementation may be a
> good summer of code project. I do not mean implementing the full d3d10 lib,
> that would be way to much, more starting the infrastructure. Henri disagreed
> with the idea, so I thought I'll write a mail for public discussion :-) .
> Looking at the timeline for SoC I hope it isn't too late.
> My idea is to start a d3d10 implementation up to the following point:
> -> Add a winver Windows Vista to make version checkers happy :-)
> -> Create the d3d10 lib and start the .idl file for header generation
> -> Write stubs for the functions to allow the app to create all the interfaces
> -> Write test cases for reference counting. ddraw and d3d9 show that Microsoft
> does not stick to its own COM rules
> -> Make methods that have already 1:1 equivalents in wined3d call wined3d. Add
> other methods as required to wined3d.
> -> Implement them as far as you feel like :-)
> I think the good thing about this is that there are is not much knowledge
> about wined3d and d3d10 necessary at the start. The one who works on it can
> learn the d3d10 interface while writing the stubs and learn about wined3d
> when starting to call it.
> Opinions? Suggestions?
The concept is nice, and I'd like to learn 3D graphic APIs better. But
when I consider DX10, I don't have any DX10 apps, nor do I have Vista.
I'd also be concerned if it is even properly documented if I were to
start that way. So I'm not thinking I want to do DX10. However, this
idea can be considered with any API that is currently not implemented.
So I think I'll want to try this with a smaller more widely used API.
More information about the wine-devel