Student Interested in Google Summer of Code 2010
matteo.mystral at gmail.com
Thu Jan 28 10:21:42 CST 2010
2010/1/28 Stefan Dösinger <stefandoesinger at gmx.at>:
> On Wednesday 27 January 2010 23:41:27 Henri Verbeet wrote:
>> The problem with the effect interface is that there are several fairly
>> large parts/dependencies to implement. For example, it has important
>> dependencies on both the (non-existent) HLSL compiler and the only
>> partially merged shader assembler
> There's another problem with any d3dx9 project: You cannot test a small subset
> of D3DX9 with any real-word game if the rest of the library is missing because
> no games use only the event interface or use only the assembler etc.
> Matteo faced this issue - there was no game that used the assembler, but
> didn't use some of the Font or Texture loading code Tony was working on. This
> meant he could only test with test cases written himself and had no success
> moment when a real game started working without native d3dx9 thanks to his
Yes, that's a relevant issue. I didn't find a single game, or even
DirectX SDK sample, which needed only the shader assembler functions
and not also some other unimplemented part of d3dx9 (expecially the
texture functions are often used).
This essentially means that you'd have to rely only on conformance
tests to have some measure of correctness of your code (and fidelity
to the behavior of native implementation), at least in the short to
> So before any further d3dx9 projects have a realistic chance at succeeding we
> need the existing code merged. If necessary I can pick up Matteo's patches,
> split them up and send them in, although it would be preferable if Matteo
> could do this himself.
I have pretty much splitted the patches up in reasonable enough (I
believe) pieces, now I just need to address the things Henri noticed
last time I sent the main patches. That's not much to fix, but these
days I'm really busy. Hopefully in some days I could dedicate some
time to this.
More information about the wine-devel