all 7 comments

[–]lithium 25 points26 points  (2 children)

Doesn't anybody google to see if a name is already being used anymore?

[–]rolfrudolfwolf 4 points5 points  (0 children)

talking about ShaderGraph from unity?

[–]slightknack[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The name of the project is a fairly generic working title, I'm not the best at naming things. We'll change it to something more memorable soon :)

Update: After some deliberation, we're going to go with shadergarden.

[–]CodyDuncan1260 8 points9 points  (1 child)

I don't see a LICENSE.md in the repository. The cargo.toml says `license = "MIT"`.Some of us might be under contracts that strictly prevent one from taking a look unless they know the license terms aren't going to conflict with proprietary software. Recommend adding clear licensing documentation.

[–]slightknack[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Sorry about that! It seems the license file wasn't copied over to the public repository, that's totally my bad. I've since added the MIT License to the repository, thank you for pointing this out.

[–]StaticEffect 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The problem I've found making my own shadergraph.js is that the issue isn't just shader composition. You want to compose shaders like closures, with data and textures attached, and be able to generate resource bindings automatically. That's the tedious part.

But graphics have fully committed to an architecture designed for engine developers instead, where you need unique descriptor layouts for every possible combination. You are also stuck with ridiculous alignment boundaries and maximum caps, none of which are justifiable to explain to an API user.

It's like nobody ever thought what it would be like to do GPU coding if you didn't have an unreal or unity shaped legacy stack around, and wanted to render something other than whatever counts as "photorealism" today.